Suggestions for the WSIS +20 High-Level Event 2025
Innovative Ideas: What new ideas or changes would make the event structure and programming more impactful? E.g. Matchmaking and partnership activities between countries and sectors
The WSIS+20 High-Level Event will be a critically important forum for discussion around the WSIS+20 Review. As such, it’s essential that the organisation of this event is based firmly on the inclusive multistakeholder model for Internet governance, and that it maximizes participation from all key stakeholders, including governments, civil society, academia, the private sector and the technical community.
A multistakeholder, inclusive process is essential to ensure that all stakeholders can come together and reflect on the progress and achievements made since the original Geneva and Tunis Summits, and on the significant challenges that lie ahead.
In this vein, we are concerned that the “Organization Type” pull-down menu for this consultation combines Academia with the Technical Community — i.e. “Academia / Technical Community.” We would note that these are two stakeholder groups, with unique and varied contributions and expertise. In particular, the technical community not only contributes technical expertise, but also the strategic and operational responsibility for running the Internet’s core infrastructure.
We would also note that TCCM is a global initiative. In the absence of a “Global” option under the required “Organization Country” pull-down menu for this consultation, the submitting TCCM member has selected their country of residence (Canada).
Alignment with the SDGs: How can the WSIS+20 High-Level Event better support the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? What new strategies should be considered in light of the UNGA WSIS+20 Review?
A driver of innovation, progress and development, digital technologies touch all aspects of human life, and are a critical tool in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These transformative technologies should continue to be governed through collaboration across varied overlapping stakeholders and processes, involving the participation of distinct stakeholder groups, including governments, civil society, academia, the private sector and the technical community.
Stronger alignment toward the achievement of the 2030 Agenda requires ensuring that all stakeholders are involved on an equal basis in discussions, deliberations, and decisions that seek to maximise digital opportunities and address digital risks and challenges. Mechanisms to better enable the participation of all stakeholders are also required to realize this aim.
An evolved and strengthened multistakeholder approach will foster effective, fit for purpose solutions, based on relevant and targeted expertise responding to specific issues and challenges. We believe that this is the best path forward to ensure that digital technologies are accessible and available to all— and therefore remain a critical tool in achieving the SDGs.
Key Topics for the High-Level Segment: What are the most pressing global issues or emerging trends that should be highlighted during the High-Level Segment to stay relevant and impactful?
We anticipate that emerging technologies, especially those related to artificial intelligence (AI), will play a significant role in the WSIS+20 review and future vision. As noted in the NETmundial+10 Multistakeholder Statement, such new technologies “present us with opportunities and challenges, impacting economic, political, and civic spheres.”
A key benefit of the multistakeholder approach is that it allows for the flexibility to address ever-evolving new technologies like AI and their implications.
Effective solutions must be developed via multistakeholder processes, providing open and inclusive bottom-up participation and transparent, consensus-based decision-making. Continued support for multistakeholder approaches ensures robust decision-making and a sustainable networked world.
Format for High-Level Segment: What interactive formats could make the High-Level Segment more dynamic and engaging?
The High-Level Segment should be designed in a way that maximizes participation from all stakeholder groups, at the level of both speakers and audience. It should also foreground perspectives from currently under-represented stakeholder groups and regions.
As part of the WSIS+20 HLE 2025’s public communications efforts, including in the High-Level Segment, we would greatly appreciate an analysis of responses to this Open Consultation Process from the global multistakeholder community. Among other things, this analysis should summarize, document and publish submitted responses from the community, and outline how these responses are integrated into the HLE’s program and reflected in the event’s outcomes.
Visibility of Local and Cross-Sectoral Initiatives: How can we better highlight local and cross-sectoral efforts during the event to inspire wider participation?
No response provided.
Inclusive Participation: How can we design the parallel sessions to ensure diverse and balanced participation?
It’s essential to ensure the parallel sessions maximize participation from all Internet governance stakeholder groups, including governments, civil society, academia, the private sector and the technical community.
WSIS Action Lines Stocktaking
What are the main achievements in the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines in the past 20 years?
C1 The role of governments and all stakeholders in the promotion of ICTs for development: The Internet is a key infrastructure enabling the development of societies, economies, communities and cultures all around the world, in support of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The Internet of today has been shaped into that vital infrastructure by its multi-stakeholder decision-making in its governance processes, which include the needs and priorities of all those who use it, who provide it and who operate it. This multistakeholder governance model is integral to the value the Internet offers to people all around the world.
C2 Information and communication infrastructure: Expanding infrastructure provides more people with reliable and affordable connectivity. There are many examples of positive government and private sector collaboration in this area.
C3 Access to information and knowledge: The Internet enhances opportunities for education, and reducing barriers to accessing information, particularly through the easier diffusion of such at lower cost than physical means allow.
C7 ICT applications (especially e-government, e-business, e-learning, e-health): The role of the Internet as a driver of C7 was demonstrated during COVID lockdowns: the digital transformation was accelerated, the Internet kept working and expanded to meet greater demand. However, we also need to acknowledge the ongoing digital divide between regions, with not everyone enjoying the same access and benefits.
C8 Cultural diversity and identity, linguistic diversity, local content: It’s important that everyone can engage online in their own language. Internationalised Domain Names can help facilitate this, and work on promoting Universal Acceptance is taking place. There is still much work to do, but other writing scripts were not even possible at the first WSIS.
From a technical perspective, full support for IDNs and Universal Acceptance requires ongoing improvements in application, software, and digital platforms to correctly process domain names in different scripts. This includes enhancing domain resolution, user interfaces, and security measures to prevent homograph attacks while ensuring accessibility. Active participation from the technical community is essential in driving these developments, collaborating on standards, and implementing best practices to achieve a truly inclusive and multilingual Internet.
What are the key challenges in implementing the WSIS Action Lines and what areas that have not been adequately captured by the framework of the existing 11 WSIS Action Lines that would need to be addressed beyond 2025?
C1 The role of governments and all stakeholders in the promotion of ICTs for development: The WSIS process has highlighted the reality that multistakeholder expertise is a critical component to harnessing the benefits of rapidly evolving technology. However, challenges remain. The lack of appropriate pathways that allow for WSIS outcomes, including IGF discussions, to influence policy development, is a key challenge. The result is that insights gathered under the WSIS and IGF banner comprise a huge resource, and yet are not fully captured, distilled, and then shared or utilised to their full potential.
The current voluntary funding model for the IGF, and its lack of a permanent mandate, places it in an inherently precarious position. It is, however, essential to ensure that addressing these challenges does not compromise the IGF’s independence. We are also concerned that the creation of new or expanded multilateral bodies, such as the Office of Digital and Emerging Technologies (ODET), raises a risk of redundancy given ODET’s wide scope and mandate, and threatens to weaken the crucial role of the IGF in meaningfully advancing the implementation of GDC commitments and the WSIS action lines.
Enabling the IGF to reach its full potential would reflect the WSIS process’s commitment to multistakeholderism, mitigate the costs and administration required for implementation, reflect the widespread support for the IGF from the multistakeholder community, and leverage the history and expertise housed in and around this and other existing processes.
What are the key emerging issues and trends in the field of ICTs for development that should be taken into consideration for the WSIS+20 review?
The Internet and its governance model are fundamentally connected, and they are both a precious resource for the world. That is why WSIS acknowledged and endorsed it. We call on the WSIS+20 Review to similarly recognise and endorse the potential of the Internet as a force for human development, and the importance of its multistakeholder governance and decision-making processes to delivering that potential.
A multistakeholder approach, in which all concerned can engage with these challenges on an equal basis, is key to enhancing our global capacity to implement the WSIS principles and their corresponding Action Lines. We highlight that a key benefit of the multistakeholder approach is its flexibility with regard to addressing new and emerging areas and technologies — bringing together key stakeholders from across government, civil society, academia, the private sector and the technical community, to develop effective solutions.
Looking ahead to WSIS+20 and beyond, what is your vision for the future of the WSIS process and its role in shaping the global digital agenda?
There is significant room to further strengthen multistakeholder processes such as the IGF and WSIS Forum, both to broaden their scope and to place them on a more solid, permanent footing. The IGF in particular requires a permanent mandate and a commitment to stable and secure long-term funding, while maintaining its independence. It also needs continued efforts to increase diverse participation from all stakeholders.
As articulated in the NETmundial 2014 Internet Governance Process Principles: “Overall, it is essential that these multistakeholder processes are strengthened so that we can build consensus around identifying and implementing effective solutions to the challenges we face. We need to ensure that all stakeholders can contribute effectively to such processes and see their contributions tangibly reflected in outcomes such as guidelines and recommendations.”
***
Please note that TCCM statements are endorsed by members on an opt-in basis. Please see the list of endorsing organizations below. (This list is updated on a routine basis).
.au Domain Administration (auDA)
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)
Associação DNS.PT, .PT
Council of European National Top-Level Domain Registries (CENTR)
CIRA, Canadian Internet Registration Authority
DENIC eG
DotAsia Organisation
Identity Digital
Internet New Zealand Incorporated (InternetNZ)
Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC)
Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. (JPRS)
Kenya Network Information Centre (KeNIC)
Network Information Center Costa Rica (NIC Costa Rica)
Nominet UK
Norid
Registry.si, Arnes
Taiwan Network Information Center (TWNIC)