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.
***
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Hello everyone. Welcome to the panel. If you were online, welcome. If you are here in front of us. Welcome. This is the panel bridging the compute divide, a global alliance for AI. If you ask it is the global alliance or a global. I think might be a global alliance and even many global alliances. As long as we have this idea of global alliance. We'll introduce the panel and three rounds of questions and then we'll open for your comments.
Let me explain why we believe we need a global alliance for AI.
My name is Fabro Steibel. I'm director of ITS Rio. And is it is a Civil Society. Last year on the topic of technical diversity we came with the problem challenge that compute power will be very limited. And this is a different problem for society of information.
Brazil has 1% of all data centres of the world. That's half of Latin America. According to EA, numbers released this week, Brazil has 0.2% of the computational power. And it is not to say that Brazil or any other country needs to have its own capacity, its own compute power. But the idea is to access.
There is a big challenge for access if you look for the global north and the Global South bridge or other bridges you can do. This is why we suggest a global alliance for AI. What we called GAVI for AI. Global alliance for (?) in 2000. They started to put together. Limited in the market. Same problem with computer power. Might be energy. Might be compute parts but limited supply of these elements to buy.
Together they could have three groups working. One that gets the money and makes sure everything accountable. Two, makes a technical definition of what they should buy. And three A group decides how to share, how to distribute whatever they are doing.
Today they are responsible for more than a third of the vaccines purchased in the world yearly. They were able to bridge the limited supply and were able to increase access to vaccines. Is it the same for compute power? Some yes, some no. What are the lessons to be learned? What is the different approaches we have? So this is the intro.
I will pass the word to the speakers. We have very different stakeholders here. Which is the best approach to see the problem from different ways.
So Jason, I want to start with you. Jason Slater is chief AI digital innovation officer at UNIDO. It is about (?) development. Very important for the topic. Jason.
>> JASON SLATER: Thank you very much for having me here today. My name is Jason Slater. Chief AI innovation and digital office of the United Nations digital investment organisation. We're an organisation that's been around nearly of years now. We're a specialized UN agency with a very specific focus on how can we ensure a sustainable industrial development. Also economic development for that matter.
We have three very clear priorities right now that we are focusing on in the areas of sustainable supply chains. World without hunger, and how can we support climate mitigation.
And basically my job is to make sure through AI innovation and digital, how can we support all of those as a cross‑cutting initiative. Thank you.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you very much Jason.
We go now online. We go for Elena Estavillo Flores. Founded a think tank to work to build a digital future in ethical, responsible and inclusive way. Elena, can you hear us?
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Yes, I hear you very well. Hello.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Please introduce yourself briefly and then later we go for two questions.
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Introduce myself, yes of course. I work for an independent think tank and we work to foster ethical digital technology, inclusion, responsibility and I myself have a long ‑‑ I have a long career in regulation in public policy. I was regulator for telecommunications in Mexico. And also ‑‑ and I also have talked for many years. I'm an economist.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you very much. I like very much to have economists in the panel.
I'll move now to Ivy Lau‑Schindewolf.
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Hi. Thank you for having me and having and organising this panel. I'm Ivy Lau‑Schindewolf, part of global affairs team in AI based in our San Francisco head quarter. I wear two hats. One I coordinate our work and growth markets and African and American APAC. And other hat I wear is hem lead our multi lateral engagements. Thank you very much to be hear.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you very much Ivy. Alisson O'Beirne. In the government of Canada.
>> ALISSON O'BEIRNE: Thank you so much. Hi focus. Allison O'Beirne. As mentioned I'm the director for international telecoms and internet policy for our little team in our what is equivalent for the industry in government of Canada. Responsibilities for both the ITU and internet governance files for government of Canada and role I've been in actually just under a year now. This is my first IGF and I'm delighted to be able to experience it live and in person after hearing about how great this forum is for many years. I previously spent about 5 years in our same industry department on AI policy so this is an issue near and dear to my heart for sure.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. And Canada was one of the first countries to jump in the AI regulation arena.
So let's move to a first question. What are the key (?) barriers to equitable access to power for AI development and how can international cooperation in particular help to address them? What barriers we have to achieve access?
Jason? Would you like to start?
>> JASON SLATER: Yes, thank you. I guess a few things what we see here. In terms of AI computing power. This is really concentrated in only a few nations right now. I think it is roughly around 30.
Primarily US and China, et cetera.
And way I want to tackle this is really by looking at it from a you doe's perspective that who are the member states we're trying to support and where do we see this AI computing divide. If we look at Africa, for example we still see there that, you know, well roughly global there is nearly 3 billion still unconnected. This is a huge challenge. You see in Africa alone in terms of AI and digital tools the adoption in the region of 25%.
So for me, one is of course in terms of you thinking about computing power and we have what we call these compute deserts where we have these zones where there is just simply no connectivity.
We also have to sea it from how do we ensure adoption. How do we also look at it from a skills perspective? So there is a huge skills gap that we're seeing right now. And again, if I look at Africa in particular. But there is some positive news. And I think we'll come to that later when fellow panelists have had a chance to speak.
Those are some of the barriers we're seeing right now. One of the thing. That has been framed very clearly by the Global Digital Compact that was endorsed last September in the United Nations general assembly. I was very fortunate to be at the ceremony that was celebrating us coming together under the pact for the future. And one of my actual roles in the UN and that was what I would do as call for action today I'm vice chairing objective number 2 on inclusive digital economy which closely linked to objective 5 on AI.
Mine is that we know what those challenges are. Which challenges convert themselves into the barriers. And how can we then switch that into a much more positive and solution mode? And I'll hold back on that because I think later on I'd like to talk about some of the things not only we're doing but with our private sector partners and other stakeholders we're putting in place.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you very much Jason. Very good experiences on quantum computing and challenge to share. And topics bring us very closely to meaningful connectivity which is interesting way to see the problem from 10 years ago to today.
So I move now the Ivy.
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Yeah. I keep thinking about the way, the phrase equitable access. And what the barriers are. And I actually want to like take a step back and think about, like, just barriers to access. Period.
And what comes to mind, and I think it is important to take a moment to think about the gap between supply and demand. That everyone faces. It is actually ‑‑ we have reached ‑‑ we have received a lot of outreach from countries with a question of how much demand there really is. Do we actually? You know we have this idea that we need GPUs, but how much? Can you help us qualify?
And to be honest it is not a question we have thought a lot about until we have seen how fast the demand for our product have grown. When we launched ChatGPT in 2022 or '23 now I can't remember. Seems like a long time ago. We thought it was a low key research preview that nobody would use and pay attention to. But then we actually ended up having a hundred million users in one month and now we have 500 million weekly active users. And seeing on X, GPUs were melting. No they are not. But we actually have seen a huge inference demand. And that is not ‑‑ we knew training models would involve a lot of GPUs. But even we ourselves have underestimated how much demand there will be on inference. And as we've seen the cost has come down. And when the cost of serving these molts come down, the demand and use also went up. And when we plotted out in a model, we realised oh no. We're not on a trajectory to meet the demands. And so even we, ourselves, in the US, realise we need access to more GPUs.
And that's why we launched star gate and why we launch Open AI for countries. And I'll share more about that later. But I think I want to like throw out the framing that yes, we should think about the divide and whether the access is equitable. But maybe if we can zoom out a little bit. The problem isn't inequitable access. The problem is everyone needs more. How do we solve for the gap between supply and demand everywhere?
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. And I like to think like Brazil we need to prepare for 5G and no connectivity. And you have to take both paths together. Because we have both audiences.
So I will go online now to Elena.
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Yes, thank you. I was also reflecting on the question. Because when we ask if we have enough access. Maybe we're thinking that there is computational power and the problem is how to access it. How to access it equitably.
But in this aspect we have the problem of not enough computational power now. So it is a double question about meeting demand and supply. And then interesting the mechanisms so that everybody has, the interested parties, has this equitable access. So it is not just a case of making sure to access to something that exists but how to produce it.
And then we have many barriers that keep just reinforcing themselves. And I'm thinking mostly of in America the case that I know better. Because we have ‑‑ we don't have enough access to basic infrastructure, to services, to capacity in those services. Now for final users. But then this comes ‑‑ over all of this, the... the companies, the scientists, the academia, the start‑ups that could produce more services, more AI, they have this barrier because there is not enough compute power so that they can develop AI that is focussed on the region, culture, needs, ways of deciding on how to use AI for which needs, for which problems to solve.
So this is just something, it is like a circle that keeps reinforcing itself. And I see something that it is something that makes me reflect on who makes the necessary investments so that there is more compute power in some countries than in others. And it is very clear that, for example, in the US mainly investment in compute power comes from companies. This is private investment that is oriented to the market.
And we don't see the same dynamics in many other countries in Latin America. And we expect much of the investment come interesting governments. But governments have not enough resources for this huge investments that we would need.
And so that is where in this idea of collaborating more producing this infrastructure, this computing infrastructure, regionally. Well, this is very attractive because individually governments don't have these resources. But also it comes to questioning us if this will be enough. We need the other side of the investment side from the private sector. So we also have to work on that. And also we can't think of collaborative efforts. But bringing together the private sector so that we can gather this sufficient resources. Coming from only the government, I don't think that those will be sufficient.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Elena. Thanks very much for contribution. Allison, do you want to go next?
>> ALISSON O'BEIRNE: Absolutely. I'll keep my comments relatively brief because I think my colleagues have done a good job so far. Maybe to raise a couple things. I think we've talked a little about. And I really want to pick up on what Elena was talking about with regard to the regional and geographic differences in terms of access. I think is one of the major challenges that we're facing.
Recognising that particularly for sort of emerging economies for the Global South there are cost issues that can be associated with, you know, developing or establishing compute capacity, the cost of creating compute capacity is not the same in every region. That there are issues that come to infrastructure, to latency that already exist that have to be addressed to establish commute capacity. Also I want to acknowledge there is a real concentration of the current compute capacity in the hands of a very few providers who have incentives because of the scale of the demand and because of their proximity have incentives to really focus on sort of North American and Western European markets.
So with those barriers that I think various folks on the panel have talked about. One thick to note is real challenge is some of those barriers are not only complex, but they are compounding. They are self‑perpetuating. So as folks are left behind and as there is lack in compute capacity or some cases lacking infrastructure or some cases even lacking demand side, like we talked about, you know, lacking skills or lacking awareness of the necessity of compute power. Those that are already behind the game are going to be left further and further behind because as the demand increases in those places that already have compute capacity, we're going to see just a continuation of response to that instead of a more equitable approach.
So I think that is a place where governments and particularly international discussions and dialogues are critical. Because you can't rely on market forces to be able to correct for that need for equity and access.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Allison. And I think you remember that the legacy of the digital divide keeps going. And then we have new challenges. And the old challenges all together.
I'll go for the second question of the panel. What lessons can be drawn from global public goods initiatives. Such as GAVI that I mentioned before. Lessons to design multi lateral framework that ensures fair distribution of compute resources needed if are AI development.
So Jason, we start with you.
>> JASON SLATER: Yeah, thank you.
Uhm... hmm. I think there is a lot of positives that we can look at. I mean, we when you talk about multi lateral or multi stakeholder frameworks, it is we actually launched a similar thing already. Near two years ago now. It is known as AI for manufacturing. It is a global alliance.
And what the purpose of this is that as a UN agency that you act as a trusted advisor, if you like, to convene and bring together stakeholders. We have around 140 members now from over 40 countries. And it is a complete mix of academia, think tanks, private sector. We've got people supervisors, you know, Google, Huawei. And those two around the table and trying to see a way to leverage AI to support manufacturing primarily if those countries that we want to support. So these are, you know, developing our middle income countries.
In terms of how GAVI and what it did in bringing together the framework? I think there are a lot of positives that one can see in it. I just see, from the perspective what we're doing, around this aim global alliance.Ed not to be confused with the title. Is we want to make it much more solution oriented. So when we talk around here now of digital divide, of lack of skills, of... let's understand where we need to deploy such solutions et cetera. So really become much more solution‑oriented. We hear enough about the problems going on when the title here talking about geopolitical issues, we in the UN are fully understanding that right now but let's get on the front foot, yeah?
We do know there are gaps. We know, for example, when we talk about computing power, we know whether a challenge is right now when it comes to growing a tomato and getting a tomato in Kenya to the market. And how 20% of that is lost. And here is perfect use case for how AI can help it. So for me, bring all the stakeholders together from the people who knee all the way those who provide. And frankly from the UN to have this convening role that actually is a trusted advisor is a phenomenal thing that we can learn based on experiences of what happened with GAVI and that scheme before. Thank you.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Jason. And I love that you bring the tomato from Kenya. Because it moves away from the prompting users normal and resembles rural areas, manufacturing, intermediaries.
>> JASON SLATER: I'm going to talk about coffee in a few minutes as well.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. Elena, do you want go next?
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Yes. Of course. About lessons, I think that we have many lessons. One of how that an inclusive governance model works very well in the sense that decisions were not solely shaped by some small group of nation, of wealthier nations or a small group of corporate interests. But that there were many multi stakeholders just looking at meaningful participation for this different actors.
And Civil Society also played a very critical role in bringing transparency and monitoring and keeping this equity in central to this monitoring. And making sure that decision making was very aware of the need to ensure that distribution was fair. So we can learn from that in that if we get to build this collaboration, that compute distribution will be not only looking at technical efficiency but also on socially fairness to distributed, to give access to this computing power.
Also, of being very aware of the importance of having corrective mechanisms to address historic inequality. In these mechanisms that have to be designed that bring the factors of correcting. And to bringing local institutions and research ecosystems to engage continually with this systems. So that it is not only of bringing technology or shipping in equipment to build the centres. But to really understand how compute is used for which needs, and that local institutions and organisations are deciding on this.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Elena.
And thank you for bringing the researchers and universities back in to the topic. And I like the position you made in the technical solution to a fairness solution. It is very difficult to define what fairness is. But certainly something we have to pursue and define.
So I like it very much. Ivy, do you want to go next?
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Sure. Yeah, it is kind of hard to go after, you know, Elena. That was a very, very good point and compelling.
You know, open air is just one company in this big world and this ecosystem.
But I think we will share what we see from our own vantage point and experience. I think what I couldn't agree with more from both the GAVI example and what my co‑panelists have shared is importance of working across sectors.
And what I mean by that is we as a single company, for example, have learned from our star gait experience, that definitely could not be accomplished by one party alone.
And let me take a moment to explain what star gate is and who is involved in is it and why that is convinced me that this has to be a multistakeholder solution. Stargate is a 500 billion‑dollar infrastructure project essentially over the next fur years. And we have started building data centres in Abilene, Texas. And this is who and how it all came together.
Like GAVI, there is one group of partners that are technology and operations‑focussed. So that includes Open AI, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, ARM. And then we need another group of partners that can be finance‑focussed. And for us in this case for Stargate is Softbank. They take up the financing responsibility.
And the third group, very much like GAVI how the responsibilities are distributed and structured is the political side. This is something we are working with state governments on. And it extends to what we do internationally. And by ‑‑ this is what we have talked to the US government about.
And I think another possibility I want to posit here is... we have heard from a lot of countries that like, what they really really want ‑‑ or I shouldn't. They are not mutually exclusive.
I think they want to make sure there is access to the benefits that compute and compute‑enabled models bring.
And so in addition to thinking about infrastructure, we are also therefore very focussed on how we can make access to the solutions that compute‑enable available. And when we launch Open AI for countries, it is not copy, paste, Stargate everywhere. It is actually much more expansive than that.
We think about how we work with different education partners, universities, schools. How we increase AI literacy. So we're not just investing on the stuff, the hardware. Right? We're investing in people as well.
We make our products freely available. We have a partnership with WhatsApp. So in low connectivity settings, people can still access the benefits of intelligence that compute enables.
And all of that is something that, you know, like, as one company, this is what we're thinking about doing. But we also know that we need funding partners. We need operations partners, technology partners, political partners. Very much like GAVI. So that this is something we can coordinate and offer to the world from very different ‑‑ different levels of the stack. At the infrastructure level, the solutions level, and at like, even like a people level. So that we are as a society evolving along with the technology.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. And that reminds me that bridging the compute power might or might not involve localities. So we can process data remotely. We have done. Brazil has a partnerships with Spain for supercomputers. Finland has one. Estonia I reckon has one as well.
So we can solve problems where the energy is a possibility, where water is a possibility. But also where the supply and demand is another part of this and can be achieved.
I move now to the third question of the panel. How can Global South nations shape AI governance and infrastructure policies to reduce depends of foreign compute providers and build sustainable local AI capacity?
What lessons can be learned from the deep sea case or other cases that kind of rephrase it how we ask questions about computation of power?
Jason do you want to start?
>> JASON SLATER: No.
No. Thank you. I'm still wanting to answer if previous question.
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Tell us about the coffee.
>> JASON SLATER: Should I? I think it is very relevant to this when talk about the Global South. I talked about tomatoes before. What we did last year on side lines of the general assembly. Basically built a L lighter solution. Links to AI. Consortium of two governments. Italy, Ethiopia. Lavazza, Google. And international coffee organisation. What is it we were trying to solve? Roughly around 3 billion cups of coffee drank a day.
Ethiopia is fifth largest coffee producers. The number one coffee producer in Africa. And there is a new EU directive being issued called deforestation. So the challenge was how can you leverage AI and digitalisation to support coffee farmers?
Yeah? So that is why we built this consortium and brought everybody together. So again back to the GAVI example. This was a very specific one and there are many, many other examples. That is why it links nicely to what you mention with Stargate. It is a use case where people came together because you could not possibly solve as a UN agency or individually.
So that was the coffee example.
We brought it together. We have a solution. We went to Addis. Actually met and presented this to the coffee farm association themselves. They didn't like it. We had McKenzie present. Didn't like it. Why? They didn't understand the incentive. Our land is not subjected to deforestation. Only (?) percent. But one understands in order to comply with this directive that it opens up opportunities along the supply chain, that open ultimately about increasing productivity and what have you. Then we tapped into incentive behind it.
So when you talking about the usages et cetera and DPUs what have you. I think about so many faces out there where they don't yet know how AI and digitalisation is going to support them. So that was the very coffee example. Where are we now 12 months on? We are now looking to see whether we can actually implement and pilot that within Ethiopia.
In addition to that, that consortium are opening up an AI initiative in Italy. Bringing those examples together. Primarily in the area of coffee. So that was the specific example.
I'll answer this question later.
If I may.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: So I think ‑‑ I like very much the coffee example because it is hands on. And in deforestation, we bring the AI and climate close to each other.
So you have wonderful uses for mapping the deforestation, mapping disasters, predicting climate. And many other things. And if you do it together, if you have elements that are open that can be shared, it's certainly an asset for global climate change.
Elena, could you go next?
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Yes. Well, Ivy already said about something that I wanted to focus on. In the importance of investing in people, investing in local talent. And not just thinking up the hardware. And supporting community‑driven research. Because countries are innovating despite the infrastructure gaps. And this I find this very interesting. You know, it is something that we always are repeat now in Mexico. But I believe that it is true of many other countries. Is that given that we don't ‑‑ we have ‑‑ we don't have many resources. So then we have managed to develop ingenuity and contextual intelligence to find solutions with very limited resources.
And I see that this is happening also in AI development. That we look at wrenchers, small developers, and Civil Society that are experimenting, and they are using open source. And small scale, hybrid models. And finding interesting developments.
So I think that this is something to learn from and to at least our opportunities. And if this ingenuity is met with more infrastructure because we definitely need it. And we can find this collaborative ways to find this infrastructure, then there is an opportunity to meeting ingenuity with infrastructure.
And also I find another thing that I find very interesting is that these regions of the world, like Latin America, are pushing for more plural and justice‑centred vision of AI. And also where we emphasise not only into an individual but collective rights. And this can also help us build government, and strong governance for AI. And reshaping this AI, this governance for AI in a way that protects this different models of innovation. And different models of protecting individual and collective rights.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Elena. And you remind me of how from the Global South we just have to be creative. With scarce resources. We just have to hack it. We just have to make it happen.
It will level up the opportunities, and for sure we're going to have better results.
Ivy? Do you want to go next.
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Sure. All this talk of infrastructure just reminded me when I first landed in Oslo airport and then took the train to the city. I was like wow.
Like when trains work it is an amazing experience. And it is such a great utility. And I wish my home city of San Francisco would offer the same thing.
And I mention that example because I think when we talk about chips and compute, sometimes it just... you know, we might think of it as a different category as other infrastructure that have built cities and nations. And when you ask the question, Fabro, about what to do about that lack of access? I think it is kind of how we think about what everyone can do about the gap in supply and demand. How can we solve for the problem of access to the infrastructure? And the problem of access to the benefits of infrastructure. If we can't access to the infrastructure to the same degree, there a creative way to access the benefits?
And I want to maybe offer two more things in addition to talking about data centres. One is, I think it is important to incentivise and cultivate a vibrant local start‑up ecosystem. If you have chips, and you have maybe some people who know how to use a tool, but there aren't entrepreneurs. And if you don't, incentivise and really cultivate that growth, then I feel like we're not really facilitating access. We're not facilitating innovation. We're not facilitating access to the benefits of the technology.
So I any that it is really important. It is like one of the prongs of, you know, what we offer when we say we are ‑‑ we were launching Open AI for countries.
And the other thing is kind of touching on Elena also mentioned and what I said earlier about like investing in people. We launched Open AI academy earlier this year and we are just starting to scale. And the you haven't seen some of you are videos online already, I encourage you to do that. We've been in production like every week. And they are for all sectors and they are for all skills levels. And sometimes, you know, we offer in‑person events as well.
And the main point here is not like, look, there are more free videos to watch. There are. And like we're proud to say that we have trained 1.4 million people already. But I think like to think when we think about access, there needs to be like a very concrete way to apply the technology. And we can't do that if we don't actually know what it is and what too do that with. I very much am excited that when we move from day 0 to day 1 or day 1 to day 2, to be fair about all the progress we have seen already. That there will be a much more sophisticated and maybe even demanding approach to like how we use the compute and the tools that the compute empower and not just talking about like the stuff itself.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thanks Ivy. You remind me that prompting brings humans able to easily talk to computers. So when descriptive AI you usually need a team of technicians to code something. So we use the result.
When we have generative AI, regain the capacity to be a normal user to make use of the technology, which brings the show of supply and demand to great stress. Because now we have way more need for technologies and uses.
So Allison?
>> ALISSON O'BEIRNE: Yeah, sure. Thanks. I think the question really is about how we include Global South voices in conversations around AI and I will continue to make it a policy not to tell the Global South how to do policy but I will say I think one of the effective ways we ensure that we have voices from the Global South in the conversation and it really reflects back on what Elena was talking about in GAVI model is ensuring that we have a multistakeholder approach and one that thinks about includes a whole range of different potential partners.
So when we're talking about something like, you know, global alliance for artificial intelligence we have to think about ensuring that we're talking to large and to small providers and users. We have to think about talking about both public and private space. Like, it has to be big AI institution T accelerators, is it start‑ups, a governments all coming into the conversation together. That will be the most effective way for us to be able to make progress on ensuring equitable access to what's needed for compute capacity.
I'm going to give a little plug to a Canadian initiative in this regard because I can't be stopped. But we have from our international development research centre in Canada, IDRC, are working with the UK's foreign and Commonwealth development office that have committed sort of $10 million to the development of an equal compute network. Anyway strives to do exactly this. So it strives to bring together a number of different partners and number of different types of partners to think about equitable access to compute capacity.
And one of the things the network hopes to achieve is by bringing together a number of different sort of partners from the Global South together. It allows to the possibility to kind of create a critical mass, in order to obtain sort of better rates and better processes as they are looking to establish compute capacity.
When you have a number of different countries or institutions who are speaking together, they have greater power together than they can each individually have on their own and that is sort of the value of the both the international or global model and also the multistakeholder model. Nice little Canadian piece we've got.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: I like the Canadian piece.
With vitamin for one last question. And one thing I like about GAVI is that they have a political group on how to share the assets.
So imagine you might 100 units of something. And they will have chip in, contribute, find consensus how to share. So in the case of GAVI, part will go for countries that can pay for vaccines. So the model is sustainable. Part of the vaccines will go to country who cannot pay for vaccines so there is access.
Part goes to countries who are doing an effort to be more sustainable or to produce vaccines. And political questions that address the issue how to share. So if you can purchase, you can buy, finance. If you know what we're buying, if it is a commodity that we can have it. There is a political group that will decide on how to share it. And multistakeholder seems like a good approach to do that.
I'll go for the last questions you can advance in one of the points you made. Jason, for example, said a call to action in the first question if you want to bring back. If you want to bring from tomatoes to coffee, to something else, feel free.
And in case you have questions like, I have further questions for you. So Jason what would you like to expand.
>> JASON SLATER: Thank you. Well linking to it what you just mentioned there and GAVI. We have a Global Digital Compact in place. Pact for the future. A very clear way forward with those objectives. So that is my first. That is a multistakeholder approach. That was governments, that was tech, that was academia, we all came together.
We nearly 12 months in and there is momentum. We under the objective number 2, regarding digital economy, which links to objective 5A AI have a very clear call for solution, a call for action. In that links to what I mentioned before. We already have an alliance, a global alliance in AI for manufacturing. And which has actually three pillars to it. One our own smart money factory which is not so much about tomatoes and coffee but starts to get harder on the shop floor and how can you infuse AI in the production process and then our AI lighter solutions I just mentioned. The example I gave. Was the one around coffee. We're also building up around other products. I'm hoping we collaborate with Open AI by the way.
And the third component, and that as I mentioned is around digital economy that links it directly back. So our make sure we implement what is being committed under the GDC and last but not least a point Elena mentioned before that I also didn't ‑‑ they mentioned and you also mentioned in terms of regulation around 4G, 5G sets coming in. It is this open innovation. We also have this programme that supports that that again is not a (?) problem. It is an open one that we convene. We bring together. It is multistakeholder around innovation. How can you help those great idea, the start‑up, the innovators, and bring corporates together as well.
And importantly, investment. There is a clear funding requirement here. We come and go. Projects end. But then so what. So that's basically what I just want to mention in terms of multistakeholder, the GDC and end global and those components I also think about this model for GAVI. We are also trying to make sure there is a sustainable model in place that ensures these great ideas that's gonna come becomes something that's investable and sustainable so that anything can be ultimately replicated. Not just Ethiopia and coffee but question take it to Latin America. Tomatoes are grown in most places. How can we come and bring a solution that helps mitigate climate change.
So that would be my, please, please join us and we will do our utmost to promote solutions to people working on them.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Jason. I was in Bonne last week and the issue to how advance technology and make technology greener maybe a big thing for COP 30 this year.
Elena, moving to you. We shared challenges of talking from the Civil Society point of you. And also having point of view because we're not government. We're not companies. We are kind of wringing issues to the debate. So what topic would you like to advance?
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Well governance. We have been talking about governance. And we... but we're supposing that the system already exists. And we also need to create and to maintain the necessary incentives to create the model and then to sustain it. And one of it is to produce a model that is credible, that brings certainty. And so that people trust it. Know that people trust it. And then we have this necessary... well, yes, the trust to keep it together. And to keep investment coming.
And the countries that invest in it have also need this, the right combination of incentives to continue dedicating resources for this. And this should come from different expectations. One is to have a fair share of benefits from the model. And also, by the means of trust and credibility, to keep believing in this model that is bringing benefits to the region and benefits for inclusive development and sustainable development.
And that's why I believe that the role of Civil Society as a component of this governance that produces trust and credibility is so important.
Thank you. This reminds me that usually governments have a AI national plan for development.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: If I'm right wee see the observatory ranking 81 countries that have plan of action for AI. Brazil just released it last month.
And one key thing is what kind of pillars we have in this development. So what Elena brings is that needs to be multistakeholder. What you bring it needs to have open innovation. It has to be shared. And this is really interesting.
So Ivy, I go to you. I think one interesting point of view is that companies are very different from each other. So we think of them like (?) or something like that. But very different. Americans very different from Europeans, and very different from Chinese and countries very different. All of are trying to bring solutions from bridging the compute power from their perspective. So what point would you like to advance?
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Thank you for framing it that way. Because I was silting here thinking, you know, I really am not qualified to tell other people what to do. Like we're just one company. I can't tell governments what to do, what other companies what to do and what all of Global South should do. Right?
But from the perspective of just one company, based in San Francisco, what I think I want to ‑‑ the one call to action, so to speak is, let's use this technology to build the tools to solve hard problems. I think ‑‑ I don't know if everyone has to worry about getting chips the same way. If all of us can get the benefits to the chips the same way.
And as one company, what we are trying to do to accomplish that end is to make our tools accessible. And you know, that's why we have, like I mentioned earlier, an integration with WhatsApp. So that it is workable even in low connectivity settings. We are rolling out open weights models later this summer. And I ‑‑ what, you know, you mentioned the Brazil AI plan. And two of the examples that were mentioned in that plan were Favella GPT and Amazon GPT. We made the tool usable in lot of favelas. And also have a department with university and with Amazon so our tool is enabling conservation and health insights that are already helping residents and just to help the preserve the largest rain forest on the planet.
And this is the kind of story that really excites me. That we really ‑‑ there is so much more to come. And that progress, you know, is happening today. Right now. So let's think about how we use what exists and what is to come and to solve hard problems and advance the benefits of LLMs.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thanks Ivy.
And if you are online or wants to post a question or in the audience please make a queue. After Allison's contributions we're going open the floor for participation.
>> ALISSON O'BEIRNE: Perfect. Thanks. Following from Ivy's point, I think that there is something very important to be said for international action to support equitable of access to compute capacity. I think that there is a recognition even among those who already sort of have good access to compute. There is a recognition of the value of sort of sovereign abilities or sovereign access to compute capacity. Even in kind of western Europe and North America. So understandable that the Global South also ought to be able to play into that ecosystem that their also ought to be extendability of access there.
But going beyond extendability of compute access, I think it is also true if we don't have AI tools designed responsibly and response to the needs of local communities, access is not going to be sufficient. So having access doesn't mean anything. If we think about equitable of access, we also have to think about equitable of design. Designing AI systems and tools free from bias, that reflect linguistic diversity, climate can conscious in the way they are created and equitable of use as well. Designing AI tools that protect the individuals that are really looking to seek the benefits of the use of artificial intelligence, that protect workers, that support development purposes and that have benefits beyond kind of a small group that would already have access to privileges in that regard.
So I think really as we think about extendability of access, it has to be part of a broader conversation about equitable in the design and the use of AI systems as well.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you Allison.
Let me cheque if there is anyone online or in the audience that want to make a comment?
No?
I will cheque here. We go for our last question. I like the climate agenda and relationship with it. And what you bring, Allison, is that compute power is the start of it. And governments is will have a huge role in how to control it or make it safer, make it more secure. And they have to relate. And there is a huge challenge now for climate, which it was a problem already. Now it is a bigger problem.
So as concluding remarks, Jason, what would you like to highlight?
Or call to action?
>> JASON SLATER: I just underline what we've all in our different aspects been saying about this, you know, collaboration is absolutely critical in this moment now around AI. Understanding what the needs of it are. What the computing power of it is. Making sure we don't leave the Global South. That the divide doesn't get bigger, et cetera.
So my final comment would just be that. You know, let's join this alliance. Because as Stargate mentioned and by Ivy as what is going on with DAI factory being opened up in South Africa, collaboration between Nvidia and CASABA, in Italy, what's happening in country, AI gig factory. The as consortium of people coming together and yes taking all of those components around the ethics of AI, making sure that it is equitable. That it is transparent. Inclusive. Collaborative. It is reliable. It is safe and it ensures privacy. Privacy as with big issue on the coffee example. I didn't mention that before.
So that would be my final one. Just could not underline any further than what we've all collectively said on all those various levels. All I would offer from perspective of UNIDO, we do have a platform in place. We're happy to help and support and to join forces. Thank you.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Elena. Do you want to go for concluding remarks or highlights?
>> ELENA ESTAVILLO FLORES: Yes. Of course. And I will build upon the same ideas. Because this technologies have tend to concentrate and to build scale. So smaller countries or countries that have smaller access to resources have to collaborate. Have to collaborate to attain enough scale to be part of the movement. Otherwise we will have bigger gaps.... in our development. And so this collaboration I believe that is a must right now. To bridge gaps and to change this mode of development that has produced so many persistent gaps that will get wider.
So that's why collaboration has to be the new mode of development.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. And I hope collaboration sparks for the global alliance what is happening, what could happen outside of here. So Ivy, do you want go for concluding remarks.
>> IVY LAU-SCHINDEWOLF: Al at the risk of just repeating myself and other people, I will actually still say there is something maybe to the trifactor of political financial and technical/operational partners as the way we think about who should be at the table.
And I think that is necessary in all countries. And in all fora. So that we can truly, truly collaborate and take into account all of the equities. Because we're talking about a really massive, massive scale of infrastructure and a massive, massive potential of transformation.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you. Alisson?
>> ALISSON O'BEIRNE: Thank you. Always dangerous do go last for this kind of thing. I really want to build on the idea of collaboration, which I think a lot of us have talked about today and I think is super valuable as we're discussing how to kind of encourage equitable access to the benefits of artificial intelligence.
One thing I want to build on the concept of collaboration as the risk of being controversial is the need for collaboration to be in a spirit of openness and in a spirit of listening. And it doesn't matter what kind of extendability challenge we're talking about. Whether it is the sort of Global South's compute access, whether we're talking about linguistic diversity in the internet or AI, whether we're talking about in Canada, indigenous connectivity and indigenous data sovereignty.
When we're in this equitability conversation asks thinking about how we collaborate with partners, one of the biggest challenges we see is that ‑‑ and governments are not immune to this. We will often come to the table? A spirit of collaboration, meaning hearing is my idea and everyone needs to agree with it in order to collaborate approximate I think there needs to be a space in AI where understanding is evolving we have to come in a spirit of listening and openness and spirit of compromise as well. If we want to have collective action, we're going to have to compromise. And we're going to have to have a recognition of the needs of others. And a recognition that we don't always understand the needs of folks who are outside our own context and our own community. So I think that is one ‑‑ like if I have a call to action it is to come to collaboration anyway spirit of sometimes recognising that maybe your own positioning is wrong or you need to adjust your own approach in order to meet the needs of other communities.
If we're not able to do that, then we won't be able to take collective action on equitable issues and they can't be solved without collective action.
>> FABRO STEIBEL: Thank you.
With this I'll do some concluding remarks and end the panel.
I started the panel wondering if there is a need for global alliance. And yes, not the global alliance but many global alliances, diversity of global alliances. And the global alliances have shared problems but also communities. So they need to define the collaboration according to the communities.
Maybe the community of IGF is different from COP, which is different from G20 and so on. And collaboration is really important.
I still hope we can increase the access to compute power in the Global South somehow. Either installing compute power locally, or sharing compute power. I still hope we share compute powers amongst countries. And collaboration. So Brazil has collaboration with Spain, for example, for supercomputers. And I still hope the information society becomes enhanced by there access to technology that can be transformative but can also place risks and challenges.
So thank you very much for the participation. And we conclude.
(Applause)
