| APrIGF 2024 Session Proposal Submission Form | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 1 - Lead Organizer | |||||||||||||||
| Contact Person | |||||||||||||||
| Ms. Angela Wibawa | |||||||||||||||
| Organization / Affiliation (Please state "Individual" if appropriate) * | |||||||||||||||
| Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) | |||||||||||||||
| Designation | |||||||||||||||
| Director (Government and IGO Engagement, APAC) | |||||||||||||||
| Gender | |||||||||||||||
| Female | |||||||||||||||
| Economy of Residence | |||||||||||||||
| Singapore | |||||||||||||||
| Primary Stakeholder Group | |||||||||||||||
| Technical Community | |||||||||||||||
| List Your Organizing Partners (if any) | |||||||||||||||
| 1. au Domain Administration Limited (auDA), technical community, annaliese.williams@auda.org.au 2. Internet Society (ISOC), technical community, wan@isoc.org |
|||||||||||||||
| Part 2 - Session Proposal | |||||||||||||||
| Session Title | |||||||||||||||
| NetMundial+10, GDC, WSIS+20 – what else is happening in the world of Internet governance | |||||||||||||||
| Session Format | |||||||||||||||
| Open Mic Townhall | |||||||||||||||
| Where do you plan to organize your session? | |||||||||||||||
| Onsite at the venue (with online moderator for questions and comments from remote participants) | |||||||||||||||
| Specific Issues for Discussion | |||||||||||||||
| The transformative impact of the Internet that we celebrate today is based on the Internet being open, accessible, inclusive, and globally interoperable. The multistakeholder approach to Internet governance (IG) has allowed it to thrive. Internet standards are a great example of the benefits of diverse participation. They keep the Internet running as smoothly as we expect, especially if agreed openly and collaboratively. As IG discussions continually evolve alongside geopolitical developments, more events and processes within the UN multilateral system have come to the fore that impact on IG discussions. These include the new Global Digital Compact (GDC) as part of the UN Summit of the Future, the ITU WSIS+20 Forum High Level Event, and the impending WSIS+20 review process in 2025. Outside the UN system, the announcement of the NetMundial+10 meeting is perhaps another response from the multistakeholder community to all these UN processes. This session will inform the Asia Pacific community of the outcome and/or progress of discussions at NetMundial+10, ITU WSIS+20 Forum High Level Event, and GDC, and will examine their potential impact to the future of the Internet, including how they might affect or influence the 2025 UN WSIS+20 review process. Most importantly, the session will encourage community discussions on the importance of the multistakeholder approach, and how these developments could impact the Asia Pacific region. The session offers the opportunity to follow-up on some of the discussions from the APrIGF 2023 Townhall session “Is Fragmentation the Future of the Internet and How can we Resist?” Is there a lens in the IG discussions as referenced above which has an effect or impact on Internet fragmentation? Through guided questions (detailed in the agenda section), the APrIGF community will explore what lessons can be learnt, and how IG may further evolve as a result of these discussions. Responses to questions will be limited to two minutes per person. |
|||||||||||||||
| Describe the Relevance of Your Session to APrIGF | |||||||||||||||
| Protecting the open, accessible, inclusive and interoperable nature of the Internet, essentially preventing it from being fragmented, is directly related to the APrIGF themes of Security and Trust. The multistakeholder model of Internet governance has provided the conditions for decades of participation of all relevant stakeholders in the smooth and resilient operation of the technical layer of the Internet. However, as processes and discussions flourish in the UN multilateral environment, there is a risk for fragmentation to occur which may potentially lead to an erosion of trust on the Internet. Expected outcomes of this session are: increased understanding of the on-going international conversations related to Internet governance, and exploration of ways for the Asia Pacific community to participate in these discussions. Through the session’s open mic townhall format, we wish to give the Asia Pacific community the opportunity to voice their views, raise questions, and make constructive suggestions. These views will then inform the APrIGF Synthesis document and subsequently the global IGF. The community can also take some of the recommendations back to their local communities. |
|||||||||||||||
| Methodology / Agenda (Please add rows by clicking "+" on the right) | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
| Moderators & Speakers Info (Please complete where possible) | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
| Please explain the rationale for choosing each of the above contributors to the session. | |||||||||||||||
| Each moderator/speaker is an expert in the field of Internet governance. In addition, they are well informed of the issues around the possible threat of fragmentation. The session is designed as an open mic townhall. Hence, the moderator will facilitate discussions with the audience directly by inviting comments and dialogue. | |||||||||||||||
| Please declare if you have any potential conflict of interest with the Program Committee 2024. | |||||||||||||||
| No | |||||||||||||||
| Are you or other session contributors planning to apply for the APrIGF Fellowship Program 2024? | |||||||||||||||
| No | |||||||||||||||
| Brief Summary of Your Session | |||||||||||||||
| The participants heard updates on discussions that took place at NetMundial+10, ITU’s WSIS+20 Forum High Level Event, and the Global Digital Compact (GDC), including views from the speakers on how outcomes from these discussions could potentially impact the future of the Internet. The session accomplished its main goal of encouraging community discussions, especially around the importance of ensuring a continued multistakeholder approach in Internet Governance in the midst of related multilateral events and processes. | |||||||||||||||
| Substantive Summary of the Key Issues Raised and the Discussion | |||||||||||||||
| The participants were encouraged to share views around three guiding questions: (1) What have we learned from NetMundial+10, ITU WSIS+20 High Level Forum, and GDC processes so far? Are their approaches similar or different?; (2) What are the principles of the Internet that should be protected to avoid Internet fragmentation that need to be highlighted to policymakers?; (3) What should be the region’s key priorities for the upcoming UN WSIS+20 Review process and how can we best participate? Key points from the discussions include: ● The Asia Pacific (APAC) region could not afford to ignore Internet Governance (IG)-related events and processes that could impact Internet standards and policies. Otherwise, fragmentation at the policy level could worsen. ○ The Sao Paulo Guidelines (from NetMundial+10) is a useful document that outlines concrete steps on how to apply the multistakeholder model in Internet Governance events and processes. ● All three current IG processes are taking place outside of APAC, and very few from the APAC region are actively participating in these processes. ○ The WSIS+20 Outreach Network initiated by ICANN is a good resource for information sharing across community members. Participants were encouraged to join. ○ Specific to the technical community, the Technical Community Coalition for Multistakeholderism (TCMM) is a good initiative where the community could coalesce on possible solutions to tackle issues related to IG. ● The participants were optimistic that the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is likely to continue beyond 2025, although currently unclear on how it will take shape moving forward. The IGF has the potential to be leveraged for Internet-related discussions, including the broader digital issues. ● The multistakeholder model allows for better decision making. To effectively demonstrate the benefits of the multistakeholder model, the community should showcase concrete cases where the multistakeholder model has worked and instances where poor decisions were made in which the multistakeholder model was not applied. ● Further to discussions raised at various IG platforms, there should be a feedback mechanism on how we further communicate the merits of the multistakeholder model to the wider community. |
|||||||||||||||
| Conclusions and Suggestions of Way Forward | |||||||||||||||
| The participants agreed on the need to protect the multistakeholder model of Internet Governance, especially in view of overlapping multilateral processes. The Open Mic Townhall format was a useful approach to encourage discussions around this topic that has high community interest. Discussions on topics related to Internet Governance, including those by the multilateral processes, should be continued in future APrIGF to encourage involvement by the Asia Pacific community. There is an impetus to do this in view of the fact that the WSIS+20 Review will take place in 2025. The outcome of the WSIS+20 Review will affect how Internet Governance is approached and the continuity of the IGF. | |||||||||||||||
| Number of Attendees (Please fill in numbers) | |||||||||||||||
| Gender Balance in Moderators/Speakers (Please fill in numbers) | |||||||||||||||
| How were gender perspectives, equality, inclusion or empowerment discussed? Please provide details and context. | |||||||||||||||
| While these topics were not discussed specifically, there was a healthy mix of representatives to ensure inclusivity in the discussions. | |||||||||||||||
| Consent | |||||||||||||||
 I agree that my data can be submitted to forms.for.asia and processed by APrIGF organizers for the program selection of APrIGF 2024. |
|||||||||||||||