IGF 2019 Reports
Transparency and Control for the Internet of Things
This goal of this session is to identify the best ways to ensure consumers can make informed security choices about consumer IoT devices (and concomitant services). While different initiatives are focusing on identifying core security standards for consumer devices, there is less collaboration on mechanisms that can surface this information to consumers in a meaningful way, recognizing that security is one of many issues a consumer considers in deciding whether to purchase an IoT device. Below are three policy questions that can guide this discussion:
-
How can we help consumers understand more about the security features of IoT devices, and how can this information be standardized and surfaced in both screened and screenless environments?
-
What core security information is essential for consumers to know about before they purchase an IoT device?
-
How might consumers make more informed security choices based on security-related information that is surfaced to them?
This workshop will discuss in which ways the debate around data governance has fallen short of the goals and priorities of developing countries in pursuit of technology-enabled growth, and what governments, businesses, civil society, and academia can do to ensure cross-border governance frameworks are better tailored to low- and middle-income countries. The goal is to contribute to the design of the updated global digital cooperation architecture, under the IGF Plus model, raising awareness to the importance of considering the particularities of developing countries when designing international frameworks.
Some of the key questions are: (1) What are data governance policy priorities from the perspective of developing countries? (2) What are the tools and instruments that the international community could deploy to help developing countries best engage with the global data economy? (3) What is the future of international technology governance and how should a framework for digital cooperation look like?
Elizabeth Stuart opened the workshop highlighting the relevance of effective data governance frameworks for inclusive development in the digital age. Kamal Bhattacharya then presented the highlights of the consultation conducted by the Pathways for Prosperity Commission, arguing that current governance frameworks have been falling short of developing countries’ goals and priorities, and discussing key principles which could guide efforts to make sure that cross-border governance of digital technologies works for developing countries.
Mariana Valente shared findings from her research pointing out examples of where international rules have negatively affected developing countries, and discussing how to improve international cooperation mechanisms to better address the interests of low- and middle-income countries. Fabrizio Hochschild discussed the future of international technology governance and the architecture of the IGF Plus model – a proposed framework for digital cooperation.
International cooperation is seen as essential to include developing countries’ concerns and interests when deciding for online standards and rules. Elizabeth Stuart highlighted that international co-operation was the most promising option for making digital technology governance work for developing countries.
The final report of High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation convened by the UN Secretary-General proposed the introduction of regional help desks and regional capacity building mechanisms that could take into account particular country and community concerns in a more nuanced way, and help empower communities and regions to play active roles in the global debate.
Fabrizio argued there is also a need for capacity building at a regional and sub-regional level to make it possible for more engagement in the international fora. Mariana argued we need holistic plans, not fragmented conversations, and that developing countries need to start working together, and that UN institutions need to be aware of these issues. Kamal argued there is a pressing need for better taxinomy and better understanding of the problems we are tying to address, because we need to see what is positive about tech and what is a problem in order not to overregulate.
Almost 100 people were onsite participants, around 50% of those were women.
The session discussed the need for more and better gender disaggregated data on internet access and use. The majority of questions and contributions from the audience were from women.
Enhancing Partnership on Big data for SDGs
This session will address developmental, legal and technical issues raised by increasing concentration of data, analyze the incentives of all stakeholders involved, and feasible approach to ensure equitable access to dataset, especially case studies in developing countries.
1. Openness and Trans border data flows: What policy considerations, legal and technology frameworks should be developed for data transfers for various purposes at national, regional and global level, especially the advantages of cloud services and imported strategies in developing countries；
2. Adoption and Responsibility: recommendations on policy and technical measures apply to extended openness of dataset and reuse of knowledges, and how to achieve fairness by introducing governance frameworks. How the proposed regulatory framework hold accountable the different stakeholders (e.g. governments, academia, users, private sector) in the transnational use of data.
There was broad support for the view that Big Data undoubtedly will be driving force for transforming the World, and cross border data services will develop the knowledge for responding effectively to the risks and opportunities of society and economy development. Panelists agreed that most developing countries are still struggling to bridge the "Digital Divide" with limited investments in ICT, education and innovation. The developing countries would benefit from data governance having readily available accepted principles and guidelines to explore and make accessible a wide range of data and efficient services. The awareness, data-driven technology and best practices spreading on preservation and Open Access to data across countries and international communities will play important roles in enhancing joint efforts and achieving SDGs.
1. Reach common understanding on Incentives and challenges, and explore cooperation mechanism of multi-stakeholders on big data and governance.
2. Raise awareness and discern key factors on data governance for developing countries beyond the borders of countries and regions in achieving SDGs.
3. Enhance the cooperation on big data education and capacity building with joint efforts at national, regional and global level.
4. Define a follow-up action plan on data and come out a big data governance principles and guidelines in developing countries and roadmap in support of implementing SDGs.
As an example of regional cooperation and intergovernmental mechanism, Asia-Oceania GEO initiative approved by Group on Earth Observation(GEO) converged the resources on data, technologies and knowledges using big earth data in support of implementing SDGs. AU Agenda 2063 and accompanying indicators present both an opportunity and a challenge for Africa data ecosystem, and Senegal and Tunisia are exploring the better solution on data gathering and utilization. The climate reality project and 5P methodology, Global Change Research Data Publishing and Repository (GCdataPR) was presented as an example of Big Data Solutions from Governance to Practices for SDGs.
The IGF ecosystem may be an appropriate forum to accelerating on experiences sharing and ideas exchange on data services and internet governance. Action plans can be formulated with active engagement of multi-stakeholders and conducted through cross-disciplinary and cross-region cooperation with broad contribution. The countries may also collect the best practice and the good example of application and the communities can share them with support of internet and big data, especially in developing countries.
Onsite participants: 49
Online Participants: 10
Women Participants:24(onsite)/4(online)
The discussion was organized as a whole, in relation to any citizen, user or producer, did not directly address issues related to gender equality and/or women’s empowerment. Recommendation were proposed on how technical community, government and public sector security teams can successfully cooperate with civil society organizations. However, it did discuss the solution for how to enhance the awareness, cultivate the capability of women, fight unbalance on using internet through the education and capacity building, especially in developing countries.
1) From what angles do broadband policies and strategies approach the question of public access in libraries, and what trends are in evidence?
2) What trends can be discerned from looking at broadband policies gathered and reviewed by the ITU?
3) In order to assess the effectiveness of these initiatives in reality, what key questions and issues should be borne in mind?
There was broad support for the view that libraries play several roles in ensuring meaningful connectivity for more people: providing reliable internet access and access devices, digital literacy training, support for digital newcomers, access to digital materials and services. Several speakers emphasised the importance of such access and services for vulnerable populations.
Similarly, many speakers pointed out that public access in libraries serves to meet a wide range of broader societal needs, which are often universal across various national contexts. These include access to e-learning and e-health services, conducting online businesses and making use of financial services, accessing government and public services online. Similarly, it can support youth skills development, empower women, and bring communities together.
Many speakers pointed to Universal Service Funds as a way to support public access in libraries. This can be particularly relevant in light of World Wide Web Foundation's 2018 report, which points out that a significant number of Universal Service and Access Funds are currently underused or inactive. Making use of these funds to ensure public access in libraries and similar facilities could be an effective way to foster digital inclusion . During the session, examples of supporting public access in libraries through USFs in Kenya, Ugansa and Ghana were discussed.
Several speakers addressed the question of financial sustainability of public access solutions and policy initiatives supporting them. Many speakers suggested different ways this can be ensured - whether through government support, by libraries themselves, by local communities or other partners (e.g. from the civil society or private sectors).
Finally, several speakers pointed to the relationship between public access in libraries and other connectivity models to bring the next billion(s) online. For example, libraries can work with local communities to support community network projects, or provide connectivity to offside locations through TVWS technology.
Overarching policy recommendations (predominantly socio-cultural and economic):
- Broadband policies and Universal Service Funds should be used to support digital inclusion through public access in libraries.
- Public access in libraries should be a part of education, (ICT) infrastructure, community and rural development policies. They can amplify the reach and impact of these policies. It is important to find the right location for the library sector services and connectivity within the government infrastructure and policy frameworks.
- Ensuring meaningful connectivity through libraries requires: a broadband connectivity of a suitable speed and capacity, hardware and software, and training for library staff – to help library users develop ICT skills and to maintain ICT hardware and software within the library.
Next steps within the IGF ecosystem:
- DC-PAL will carry out case studies examining the impacts of engaging libraries in broadband plans and policies in different countries. This will allow us to gain insights into different policy approaches on the ground, the commonalities between successful strategies and interventions, good practices and lessons learned.
- Several speakers also made use of the IGF ecosystem/the session to point participants towards recent reports and documents on the topic of public access and library contributions to development and connectivity.
- In Ireland, the government is utilizing public libraries in its new broadband plan and working directly with them on three key development targets: literacy, employment, and health/wellbeing.
- In Kenya, a policy intervention by the Communications Authority and national library services equipped libraries with broadband connectivity, computers and assistive devices, capacity building for librarians, online database creation, and more. This intervention was particularly important in providing access to information for students, rural residents, and people with disabilities.
- Similarly, in Uganda, the Rural Communications Development Fund has been used to equip libraries with computers, internet access and ICT skills training. This initiative aims to alleviate cost barriers to internet access for the population.
- The Ghana Investment Fund for Electronic Communications has also equipped public and community libraries to provide last-mile connectivity, particularly in rural communities.
Related digital inclusion initiatives are also being organised by other stakeholders. For example, the “Total Digital!” initiative run by the Library Association in Germany promotes digital skills and media literacy among youth through a media content creation project.
Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL), an international NGO, has trained librarians and library users to develop digital skills and community services in many countries.
Alongside Universal Service Funds, the discussion highlighted the potential of various partnerships to support digital inclusion through public access in libraries. Several examples of civil society actors, private companies and communities offering support for public access initiatives have been mentioned.
In addition, public access in libraries can be deployed alongside other alternative connectivity models to provide internet access for underserved areas and populations: community networks and offline/cached internet. Synergies and potential for collaboration between these models can be further explored.
Finally, high-capacity and high-speed connectivity in libraries can be used not only to offer new services, but also to provide connectivity to offsite locations through such technologies as TVWS. Such offsite access could offer more flexibility or convenience for users.
30 participants, of which approximately 10 had participated online. Approximately 15 women participated onsite and online.
During the presentations, it was pointed out that libraries have the ability to specifically focus on and target connectivity (as well as broader) needs of marginalised groups, including women, and work to address gender imbalances. In addition, it was highlighted that one of the strengths of libraries as public access facilities lies in the availability of on-site support for users who are less confident with their ICT skills. This can particularly apply to new women and girl users, which makes public access in libraries more accessible and approachable for them.
DC-PAL report on the role of libraries in national broadband plans and policies, presented during the session: https://www.ifla.org/digital-plans
Key Policy Question:
How do we define foreign interference?
Expectations:
Very few, if any discussions around disinformation and election interference have focused on the idea of defining norms of behavior around what is acceptable activity in this space. In order to make progress on the commitments of multistakeholder agreements such as the G7 Charlevoix Commitment or the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace, we must be able to accurately define the issue and then agree as an international multistakeholder community on what is permissible behavior. This panel is intended to be a starting point to make progress on this pillar and the findings of the discussion will be used in follow-up roundtables across the future gatherings of the “Paris Call Communities” or other initiatives designed to make progress on cybersecurity norms against the interference of elections and democratic processes.
There was consensus that clear red lines include interference in election infrastructure and voter disenfranchisement. Hence discussion on norms that protects electoral processes and infrastructure is needed. Furthermore, due to lack of clarity of international law in this space, there was agreement that a set of criteria to measure disinformation would help to bring discussions forward. The criteria brought forward were transparency, extent of deception, purpose, scale and effect. In particular, participants agreed that more transparency is required to understand what is happening on social media platforms and then also to be able to analyse the consequences and effects it has. The scale of the operations we witness also constitutes a crucial factor for the panelists as the phanonemon as such is not new but the extent of its use is. However, it was also highlighted that the playbook of threat actors is much broader than just spreading false content. The simple manipulation of divisive domestic debates that would not be debunked by fact-checkers poses another significant problem. The panelists agreed that we are living in a post-fake news era and now have to talk about false narratives. Lastly, participants were concerned that there must be a balance between openness online and combating disinformation. Human rights such as freedom of speech must be safeguarded.
Participants agreed that a good way forward would be the further development of the above mentioned criteria to better measure harmful content online. Before these could be translated into international rules, however, customary declarations at the political level have to made. In general, creating transparency on social media platforms was seen as another crucial starting point for governments and civil society to base their analyses and policy decisions on. The latter would also bring more legal certainty to the liability regime of internet platforms for third party content. Once a more straightforward problem definition would be agreed on, online platforms should be encouraged to work together with governments on that basis. Lastly, understanding the actual impact online information has on offline behavior was also considered as essential to better address the issue at hand.
Industry participants referenced the multistakeholder initative 'Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace' as an example defining norms and rules of behaviour in cyberspace. It constitutes the largest multistakeholder initative related to cyberspace in history and the most broadly accepted political statement the international community formulated so far. Among the signatories are 77 states and over 900 private sector and civil society organizations worldwide. Furthermore, the G7 Charlevoix Commitment was named as another important political statement from the leading industrial states in the world. It recognizes the threat of foreign actors seeking to undermine democratic institutions and electoral processes. Other participants referenced academic work that reflected on how to address the issue from a normative perspective. Please find the relevant work listed below.
The panelists agreed to further explore the common elements of an influence operation which are based on five criteria, namely transparency, extent of deception, purpose, scale, and effects. The use of these criteria to assess disinformation campaigns constitutes a first step to develop a better basis of knowledge and help to verify whether, for example, electoral infrastructure had actually been compromised or not. Once there is a more straight forward problem definition, stakeholders should clearly encourage online platforms to further work on the issue.
There were aproximetely 80 participants onsite, of which over 50% were women. Online there were 8 participants following the discussion but no questions were asked through the platform.
Gender issues were not discussed per se, however, other human rights' related issues with regard to minority inclusivity were touched upon. Traditionally underrepresented parties actively contributed to the panel.
Relevant links to the discussion:
EU Disinfo Lab: https://www.disinfo.eu/
Council of Europe report (2017): https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-report-november-2017/1680764666
The influence of war and the war of influence by Duncan Hollis (2017): https://sites.temple.edu/ticlj/files/2018/10/32.1_Article-5_Hollis.pdf
Paris Call: https://pariscall.international/en/principles
G7 Charlevoix Commitment: http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/summit/2018charlevoix/democracy-commitment.html
Internet Futures and the Climate Crisis - Paths to Sustainability or Extinction?
- Which human rights are directly affected by the environmental impact of internet-dependent technologies?
- How can the digitalization and networking of the urban environment take into account the principles, and practice of environmental sustainability and “human rights by design” and in which specific areas - of public concern, geography, or internet design – can different stakeholders generate working relationships for sustainable, rights-based internet futures?
- How can global, and national internet policymaking agendas better respond to existing and future environmental issues arising from connecting the Sustainable Development Goals with those aiming to “Connect the next billion”?
The meeting opened with an introduction to the work of the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition and why the theme of this session - on the interrelationship between internet design, terms of access and use, data management and storage - is relevant to the IRPC Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet and related projects from the coalition. Presentations from representatives of Futures for Fridays and the Feminist Internet Sustainable Alex project were followed by remarks from invited panelists; representatives from Extinction Rebellion, Youth IGF, and Climate Action Tech before the four break-out groups addressed four action point questions.
Group 1 - The Internet is killing the Planet! - How can we reduce the carbon footprint of internet-dependent technologies
Group 2- Sustainability by design: Creating rights-based and environmentally conscious technologies
Group 3 - Saving the Planet and Fighting the trolls: The rise of the young climate movement in an era of structured misinformation campaigns and online harassment
Group 4 - The human cost of the Climate Crisis: How to ensure sustainable human development through the Internet and protection of rights and empowerment of climate “migrants” in the online environment
There were differing positions on whether these issues are existential - as is the view of Extinction Rebellion members, or issues best approached through self-regulation.
Suggestions for the way forward are as follows:
1) Priority to be given to seeing this issue mainstreamed in internet governance agendas, and multistakeholder consultations at the UN level, regionally, and nationally.
2) That the climate crisis, as a planetary and local issue that affects the Global South most profoundly and urgently, requires cooperation and projects to develop synergy across all sectors to raise awareness of environmental issues as integral to internet governance.
3) That it be recognized that the climate crisis and international agreements to reduce carbon emissions as one way to mitigate its symptoms is a core issue for internet governance; in its technical, socio-economic, cultural, and political dimensions
There was clear support in the meeting for the need to see this topic on internet governance agendas, and multistakeholder consultations at the UN level, regionally, and nationally along the following lines.
1) That the current climate crisis is integral to the full spectrum of internet governance decision-making from designers, service providers, and regulators.
2) The dependence on fossil fuels, related carbon footprints of online services and mobile phone/cloud services needs urgent addressing from the design perspective and business models of large platform uses.
3) Internet goods and services and their hardware, equipment specifications need to address any unintentional harms to the physical environment at all points of computing and internet-dependent devices' timelines.
4) Accountability for environmental degradation, pollution, and dependence on non-renewable energy sources need to be also part of internet business and government policy agendas.
Support was also given to cooperation and projects to develop synergy across all sectors to raise awareness of environmental issues as integral to internet governance.
As noted above, the issue of how internet governance impacts on the earth's physical environment - land, sea, and atmosphere, was put forward as an urgent issue for all stakeholders in the internet governance domain. How progress can be made at this stage was to have this point recognized and then to work with a range of stakeholders to support and inform about sustainable approaches to future decision-making that regard enviromental sustaibability-by-design.
159 participants registered. 100 attended the presentations and about 50 took part in the break-out groups.
This session was marked by 1) the youth participation and leadership and 2) the even number of female and male participants. A large number from the Global South were also active in the groups and summing up discussion.
Session Outputs based on the groups' feedback to the workshop are as follows:
Group 1 - The Internet is killing the Planet! - How can we reduce the carbon footprint of internet-dependent technologies
Issues: Manufacturing, Consumption, E-waste.
- Action plan needed to identify business models of tech firms that lead to increased data consumption e.g. moves to streaming that capture so much data have environmental impact
- Address the issues of raw materials as sources for hardware
- Address the short life-span of products and contribution to e-waste
- Incentive needed for software and systems developers nto think in energy-efficient terms at the design stage.
- In broader terms, up-stream, need holistic view of environmental impace of whole internet ecosystem
- Carbon tax could compel better uses of energy as would rewards for developing goods and services in energy-sustainable way
- GDPR requirements could include those around energy consumption
- Include calculations as Edge Devices are also very energy hungry
- A need for responsible and conscious investors.
- Need to remember the disproportionate impact that some of these, well-intentioned policies might have on Global South so cross-party and inter-regional cooperation crucial
Group 2- Sustainability by design: Creating rights-based and environmentally conscious technologies
Issues: Design, Emerging technologies, Sustainability
- Need to recognize organizations that are already taking on board environmental implications e.g. Vodafone and dot.everyone that scans the environmental costs of internet goods and services.
- Need to develop a database that can track these issues e.g. Wiki-Rate
- Need to coordinate knowledge exchange around unintended consequences e.g. impact of processing and data-storage for cryptocurruncies and dependence on fossil fuels
- Ways to be found to reward good behaviours e.g. carbon credits
- Governmental role important in all the above
- Groups such as Climatechange.AI need support as part of developing coherent ways to compare how companies are doing with respect to climate issues.
Group 3 - Saving the Planet and Fighting the trolls: The rise of the young climate movement in an era of structured misinformation campaigns and online harassment
Issues: Youth Activism vs online climate misinformation
- Group exchanged experiences with online harassment at intersection of climate activism and other forms of sexism and racism; e.g. trolling on Twitter, and an experience from a Webinar on Climate Change that had to field aggressive trolling
- Recommdning ways for service providers to develope ways to tackle these sorts of behaviours
- Issues of countries, e.g. situation in Brazil and survival of the rainforest, where oil companies and government agencies appear to be participating in disinformation campaigns that include racist discourses about indigenous peoples
- Any responses from advocacy community need to be calm and referenced to generate factual ways as responses to such attacks
- In schools and universitities need to improve education and curricula addressing digital literacy to deal with false information online
- Called for more funding to enable research on harassment of climate activists and find out if perpetrators are individuals or organized campaigns.
Group 4 - The human cost of the Climate Crisis: How to ensure sustainable human development through the Internet and protection of rights and empowerment of climate “migrants” in the online environment
Issues: digital inclusion, development through the Internet, climate “migrants” rights to access and protection in the online environment
- Case in point is the Maldives as an example of how whole countries are going under water
- Urgent action needed to address how increasing demand for internet leads to more demand for energy, leading to global warming and that leads to climate migration/refugee
- One suggestion was to get rid of Amazon given its carbon and energy use
- Need to exchange ideas and practices between sectors, and regions.
- Group noted the environmental effects on marine life through building islands and ongoing dependence in some threatened areas on the tourism industry i.e. policies needed to encourage Eco-Tourism
- Awareness-raising programs also needed to inform local people about climate change particularly in parts of the world very dependent on tourism such as water sports, diving, and activities that kill reefs
- Museums can also include more exhibitions on climate issues
- Agreed that more technology not solution so need to consider the notion of de-growth and move to tech-recycling to counter e-waste
- Whilst technological tools and programs are needed for many projects they need to be better monitored for any knock-on impacts to the environment
- How can different stakeholders ensure that new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, blockchain, 5G and other innovations do not replicate existing gender digital inequalities?
- How can we address the socio-cultural issues that translate into gender digital inequality?
- What can be done to help ensure better gender-disaggregated data on digital access, use, skills, and leadership?
Participants will critically examine the root causes of gender digital inequality and imagine the future of technology and its implications for gender equality. Participants should make commitments to advance policy and practical changes that promote gender digital equality within their spheres of influence.
There was broad agreement that technology alone cannot solve the digital gender inequality gap and that a multi-stakeholder approach coupled with more evidence driven policy making is needed in order to overcome the barriers to gender inequality in digital access, skills and leadership. Many also indicated that more participation by women as entrepreneurs, inventors and business leaders would help to redress the wider deficit in female leadership and provide much needed role models for girls in education and early careers.There was also an agreement that while mobile connectivity is spreading quickly it is not spreading equally. There was no agreement on how to approach the issue lack of internationally comparable gender-disaggregated data on most ICT indicators especially for developing countries.
We need to be able to influence policy ecosystems as much as possible but in influencing those policy ecosystems, we need leaderships that are receptive. We also need to encourage more data collection on basic gender-disaggregated indicators especially in the digital space. It is also important to include women in the decision-making process.
Initiatives in the digital space which were mentioned during the discussions include "Disrupting Harm", the Feminist Internet Research Network, "Harras Map" mobile application and UNICEF's recently launched Global Kids Online Report.
Progress can only be achived if more women are included in the decision-making process and if gender is an aspect of the design of new technologies from the very beginning.
There were roughly 30 participants present onsite and 1 participant online. Out of those participants, around 20 were women.
The discussion focused solely on gender issues as it aimed to present key findings from the EQUALS Research Group report titled “Taking Stock: Data and Evidence on Gender Equality in Access, Skills and Leadership”. Participants discussed the main barriers to digital inclusion for women such as affordability and lack of basic digital skills. Some of the solutions identified were including ICT skills as part of early educational programmes and ensuring relevant online content.
1. Inclusion of persons with disability in IGF program, communication and venue
2. Embedding ICT accessibility policy in digital inclusion policy discussions
3. Liaising with Dynamic Coalitions to enhance accessibility policy directions.
The accessibility of the IGF venue and online facilities raised a number of points, mainly positive but with suggestions for improvement. The venue itself was mostly good for physical accessibility. However, cables in some areas need to be better located away from traffic. The availability of volunteer assistants for persons with disabilities was greatly appreciated. The complexity of the scheduling software together with accessibility and usability of the website were of concern.
Embedding Internet accessibility in digital inclusion policy raised useful suggestions as accessibility is a cross-cutting issue. Increased liaison with other Dynamic Coalitions will raise awareness of the needs of persons with disability. Increased communications with NRIs that include accessibility in their programs and sharing this information with the broader NRI community will be another avenue.
The stewardship of DCAD may change in the near future. Discussions were held on various options to ensure that DCAD's website, mailing list and other resources will be available going forwards. A core DCAD committee was formed to help plan for this eventuality.
Members of DCAD will identify particular Dynamic Coalitions with which to build strong communications.
DCAD will explore mechanisms to collect data on accessibility sessions at NRIs.
31 onsite and online participants of whom 18 were women
The discussions were gender neutral
What operator model(s) for digital inclusion?
- What new business models and technological solutions can assist to narrow the digital broadband divide?
- What are the main existing challenges to expand quality and affordable broadband services in underserved areas in a context of the fast changing landscape in telecommunication markets?
- What tools could be developed to ensure that Internet access is both sustainable and inclusive (for women and girls, older people, people living with disabilities, refugees and other disadvantaged groups)?
There was broad support for the view that new operator models are needed for expanding connectivity and usage of digital technologies. Participatns discussed examples of solutions such as wholesale only operators, patnerships between traditional telecommunication operators, OTTs and communities, and bottom-up community approaches. The matter of inclusivity, engagement with users amd ensuring quality of service was mentioned by some. There was agreement that all actors in the ecosystem need to think outside of the box, including when it comes to fostering flexible regulatory frameworks for underserved areas.
- Regulators and policy makers should reduce barriers to deployment by private sector first and use public money later.
- Public intervention should be designed carefully in order not to distort the market.
- Both private and public investment should be designed with the engagement of users and communities they will service.
- Data sharing between telecommunication operators and other actors in the ecosystem (such as OTTs) should be fostered to improve investment and outcome-based regulation.
- Regulation should be shifted from one-size-fits -all to a segmented approach to account for local challenges.
- Internet para Todos, Peru
- Municipal networks in Sweden, such as Stokab
Ideas were raised in the realm of good practices to be shared among telecommunication regulators and policy makers:
- Partnerships between traditional telecommunication operators, OTTs (such as Facebook), smaller ISPs and communities can yield great solutions for connectivity, by linking the know-how of telcos, big data from OTTs and the local knowledge and human resources of local actors.
- Flexible regulatory approaches can benefit new solutions in underserved areas lead not only by traditional telecommunication operators, but also community networks and smaller providers.
- 40 people.
- 18 women.
Gender issues were reflected in the discussion by the points made around the importance of including users in the design of policies and networks and ensuring that evidence is being collected to ensure inclusion and quality goals are being met.
Data Governance by AI: Putting Human Rights at Risk?
Based on the BBC’s “question time” format in which questions prepared in advance by participants are put to the panel alongside with questions from the floor and remote participants this session explored the relationship between AI, data Governance and Human Rights in light of the question: What are the regulatory, technical, and ethical considerations for "Human Rights AI By Design”?
The panel was asked to:
- provide a definition of AI:
- Several were given, from a narrower definition of machine learning and automated-algorithm-based decision-making, to a broader definition of ‘digital intelligence’ which combines technical infrastructure and use of data.
- list three pressing issues at stake at the intersection of AI R&D and online deployment and human rights law and norms:
- augmented inequalities
- democratic deficit in decision‑making and accountability, and AI manipulation
- the importance of incorporating democracy, rule of law, fundamental rights, sustainability into AI systems
- the importance of human assessments on the impact that AI may have on the individual’s fundamentals rights
- the need to address development and sustainability issues associated to AI and understand the programmes by analysing the code and observing behaviour
Questions from participants ranged from the possibility of banning or limiting AI systems able impact fundamental rights, data bias, AI and privacy, to accountability, transparency and regulation.
There was a general consensus that regulatory frameworks are needed to ensure that fundamental rights are incorporated into AI systems and that assessments are carried out to ensure that those rights are protected throughout.
The panel acknowledged that political, gender, and racial bias in data needs to be firmly addressed and outputs discussed publicly to ensure that discriminatory frameworks are not perpetuated.
The panel also agreed that accountability is crucial and while AI systems cannot be held responsible for their output, legal persons need to be held responsible.
Action points and recommendations from the panel
- the need to take this discussion forward into the public debate, so that human beings together shape the way we take this forward
- Reengagement with democracy and strengthening of the democratic institutions. The need that people who are interested in these issues and those who have the technical know-how reengage with democracy and have a sustained engagement with the rule making process
- A legal declaration that data and digital intelligence are people’s resources, as democratic control over AI is not only possible, but also the way to ensure the existence and enforcement of human rights.
Around 150 people participated and roughly half of the participants were women
Gender bias, inequality were raised in the session, first raised by panellists and later posed in the question “Since data is essential to machine learning, how do we measure and mitigate political, gender, and racial bias in data?”
The panel recognised that bias in data is an issue that needs to be addressed and panellists agreed that although it is not possible to regulate the input that goes into the AI system, it is possible to set standards on the output and that a public participation and discussion on these outputs will be necessary to tackle the issue.