CITI Seminars on Global Digital Governance

Global digital governance concerns the “rules of the game” set by states and stakeholders for digital communication/information networks and related technologies. It encompasses post-war rule systems such as those for telecommunications; institutions and procedures created since the 1980s for Internet governance; and current efforts to establish shared rules for data, artificial intelligence, social media, interstate cyber-conflict and other issues raised by emerging technologies. The purpose of this new webinar series is to foster expert dialogue on the analytical and policy issues that continually arise across the heatedly contested and complex institutional ecosystem of global digital governance. The series seeks to build on the sort of debates that occur around multistakeholder Internet governance processes but which often go dim between international meetings and negotiations. 
  
Each session begins with a roundtable discussion among a panel of leading analysts and practitioners, which is followed by open discussion among all attendees. The sessions will be held monthly during university semesters at 11:00-12:30 (New York time). They are organized and moderated by Dr. William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information (www.williamdrake.org).

In recent years there has been debate in U.S. foreign policy circles about ways to strengthen cooperation among democratic countries seeking to promote Internet freedom and openness.  In this context, the Biden Administration considered spearheading a new alliance to work alongside other initiatives on democracy promotion and Internet freedom, and in April 2022 launched a Declaration for the Future of the Internet with sixty partner countries.  But two years on, the policy environment has changed dramatically.   Digital cooperation among the liberal democracies is now complicated by a host of new disagreements over trade, regulation, security, information and geopolitical alignments.  At the same time, digital cooperation among nondemocratic governments is proceeding without such disruptions and is producing results. These trends raise a number of pressing questions about the future of global digital governance in general and the international coalitional dynamics around Internet freedom and openness in particular. 

What has and has not been achieved in this issue-area, and what is the state of play today?  How might the apparent weakening of the coalition of liberal democracies impact the international politics of Internet freedom and openness in the years ahead?  How might key countries, regions and multinational companies adapt to the new environment?  Can multistakeholder cooperation help to fill in any gaps and influence the trajectory of change?  

This webinar will take stock of these and related questions.  A panel of experts with hands-on experience in this field will lead off the conversation, and then the rest of the session will be devoted to open discussion among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Eileen Donahoe is a diplomat and human rights advocate working at the intersection of technology, human agency, digital freedom, and governance innovation. She served as U.S. Special Envoy for Digital Freedom in the Biden Administration and as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Council in the Obama Administration. Between those diplomatic posts, she was the Executive Director of the Global Digital Policy Incubator at Stanford University.   

Ambassador David A. Gross, a partner with the Washington, DC firm of Wiley Rein LLP, is widely recognized as one of the world’s foremost experts on international telecommunications and Internet policies, having addressed the UN General Assembly and led more U.S. delegations to major international telecommunication conferences than anyone else in modern history. He served as the U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy in the Bush Administration from 2001 to 2009.   

Jason Pielemeier is Executive Director of the Global Network Initiative, a multistakeholder human rights collaboration among technology companies, academics, human rights and press freedom groups and investors. Prior to joining GNI, Jason was a Special Advisor at the U.S. Department of State from 2010 to 2017, where he led the Internet Freedom, Business, and Human Rights section in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. In that role, Jason worked with governments and stakeholders around the world to promote and protect human rights online.

The United Nations' Open-Ended Working Group on Information and Communication Technologies is meeting February 17–21 in New York.  The OEWG is mandated from 2021 to 2025 to promote dialogue and the development of norms of responsible state behavior regarding interstate cybersecurity and cyberconflict.  The meeting could be marred by long-standing controversies over the design of new norms and obligations, the application of international law, confidence building measures, the participation of stakeholders in intergovernmental cybersecurity discussions, and the design of the new permanent UN forum for these issues to be launched next year. In addition, there are divisions on a Russian proposal to negotiate a legally binding UN Cybersecurity Convention in the wake of the recently adopted and problematic Cybercrime Convention.

The current OEWG is part of a matrix of processes that have been struggling to build consensus on the international rules of the game for cybersecurity.  This includes a previous OEWG that ran from 2019 to 2021, six UN Groups of Governmental Experts convened between 2004 to 2021, and other multilateral discussions.  In parallel, multistakeholder collaborations and the private sector have advanced a number of proposals for international norms and regimes.

The purpose of this webinar is to step back from the details of these individual processes and take stock of the big picture state of play in international cybersecurity negotiations.  What are the key battle lines between states and their respective coalitions, and what has and has not been achieved in consequence?  Has multistakeholder participation in the UN and nongovernmental initiatives influenced the governance landscape?  How consequential can multilateral frameworks be in shaping the behavior of states, in particular the major powers?

A panel of leading experts on cybersecurity norms and the UN negotiations will lead off the discussion, and then the rest of the session will be devoted to open conversation among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Alexander Klimburg is a researcher and adviser at a number of US and European think-tanks, a former executive of the World Economic Forum, and the author of dozens of publications including the book, The Darkening Web. He was the initiator and director of the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace, which played an important role in advancing not only norms of behavior in cyberspace, but also the importance of the multistakeholder model in international governance.  (Austria)

Sheetal Kumar is an independent consultant and expert on internet governance and human rights focusing on advocacy strategy development and implementation, capacity building and training, and research and stakeholder engagement in global policy forums. She previously headed Global Partner Digital's multilateral engagement to support rights-respecting norms and standards related to digital technology.  (United Kingdom)

Christopher Painter is an expert on cybersecurity, cybercrime and cyber diplomacy.  He has been a prosecutor of high-profile cybercrime cases and a senior official at the US Department of Justice, the FBI, and the National Security Council, and was the first dedicated high-level cyber diplomat at the State Department.  Since leaving the government in late 2017, he has served as a Commissioner on the Global Commission for the Stability of Cyberspace, the President of the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, and in other leadership roles related to cyber issues.  (USA)

Discussant

Janis Karklins is Latvia's Ambassador at Large on the UN Global Agenda. Previously he was  Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe, the UN Organization in Geneva, and the UN Conference on Disarmament; founding Director of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence; Assistant Director-General of UNESCO; and Vice-President of the Preparatory Committee of the Geneva Phase of the World Summit on the Information Society and President of the Preparatory Committee of the Tunis Phase.  (Latvia)

Register Here

The UN's 2002-2005 World Summit on the Information Society process was a watershed in the evolution of global digital governance.  Among its many impacts were the world-wide institutionalization of Internet governance and other information society issues across organizations and governments; the mobilization of civil society, business and Internet technical community stakeholders, and unprecedented coordination among them; the consolidation of multistakeholder participation in global digital cooperation; and the launching of multiple UN action lines and initiatives like the Internet Governance Forum and the negotiations over enhanced cooperation.

In 2025 the UN is organizing a 20-year review of the WSIS.  Since 2006, the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development has done regular WSIS reviews for the General Assembly and is now preparing its WSIS+20 report, and since 2024 multiple other UN bodies have launched assessments and consultations among member governments and stakeholders. The results of all this work will feed into two key meetings: a July High-Level Event in Geneva, and an autumn UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting in New York City that will take decisions on further actions, including the possible renewal of the IGF's mandate.  The procedural modalities have not been settled yet but the deadlines for stakeholders to submit written inputs are January 31 for the International Telecommunication Union's working group and March 14 for the High-Level event.

Despite the looming deadlines, stakeholder mobilization appears to be lagging a bit.  Accordingly, the objective of this webinar is to help stimulate dialogue and consensus-building.  Three main questions will structure the discussion: 1) What sort of +20 agreement would be desirable, e.g. just a reaffirmation of the WSIS outcomes and perhaps the UN's 2024 Global Digital Compact, or a new deal encompassing new issues since 2005?  2) What is actually possible to achieve given the current states of digital geopolitics among governments, cooperation among stakeholders, and current technological and market dynamics?  3) How should stakeholders engage and collaborate over the next months? 

A panel of closely involved WSIS veterans will lead off the discussion, and then the rest of the session will be devoted to open conversation among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Anita Gurumurthy is a founding member and Executive Director of IT for Change. She serves on various bodies including as Co-Lead of the T20’s digital transformation working group, and has been part of the High-Level Committee of the NetMundial+10, the UN Secretary-General’s 10-Member Group on Technology Facilitation, and the Paris Peace Forum’s working group on algorithmic governance. Anita is also a Board member of the ETC Group and University centers such as the Tech & Policy Lab at the University of Western Australia and the International Development and Social Change program of Loughborough University.  IT for Change acts as the secretariat of the of the Global Digital Justice Forum, a network of thirty-four civil society organizations.  (India)

David Souter is an independent researcher and writer on the impact of the digital society on economy, society, environment and governance.  He served as CEO of the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation from 1995 to 2003, and has worked at the London School of Economics and Strathclyde University.  In the last ten years he has worked mostly for United Nations agencies including UNESCO, UNCTAD, ITU, CSTD and DESA.  He was lead author of UNESCO's Internet Universality Indicator framework and of the CSTD's WSIS+10 review, and is currently leading CSTD's work on the WSIS+20 review.  (United Kingdom)

Paul Wilson has worked in Internet services, management and governance for 35 years, including nearly 25 years in Australia as the head of APNIC, the Regional Internet address Registry for Asia Pacific.  Paul has been closely involved in the WSIS, IGF, ICANN and other Internet coordination processes; was a member of the IGF's Multistakholder Advisory Group for 2 terms; served as Chair of the Asia Pacific IGF for several years; and served on the High-Level Advisory Committee of the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen, China. He was closely involved in the establishment and evolution of the IGF, the IANA Transition process, and the evolution of the RIR system for stewardship of the Internet’s IP addressing resources. (United States)

The Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law is the first international treaty on AI governance.  Adopted in May 2024, the Convention was negotiated in two years by the Council's 46 member states, the European Union, and 11 non-members that include the United States.  The treaty sets out general obligations and principles on such issues as human dignity and autonomy, transparency and oversight, accountability, nondiscrimination, privacy, reliability and security; requirements for risk and impact assessments, including testing, monitoring, and the possibility of bans or moratoriums on certain systems; and remedies, procedural rights and safeguards, including the ability to lodge complaints and know when one is interacting with AI instead of a human being.  The framework covers AI systems used by public authorities and private actors acting on their behalf, but there are carve-outs for national security, national defense, and research and development.   Similarly, at the insistence of the United States and like-minded governments, the Convention eschews uniform binding rules for the private sector and instead allows states to opt-in application to their companies or to pursue self-regulatory approaches.  Others participants in the process opposed this limitation, which in the view of many in civil society significantly weakens the agreement.

The Convention's proponents hope that it will become a global framework akin to the Council's 2001 Cybercrime Convention.  The Convention also will be nested within an increasingly complex mesh of international governance arrangements for AI that is under construction in the United Nations and multiple other multilateral processes.  As such, there are many questions to explore.  For example, what mix of interests drove the process and shaped the outcome?  Is the treaty an important achievement, an example of regulatory overreach, or unlikely to have significant effects?  What are the implications of carving out national security and related issues, and of not uniformly applying mandatory obligations on the private sector?  How do we assess the trade-off between having strong rules and bringing governments with diverse positions onboard?  How effective was the blending of intergovernmental decision-making and multistakeholder participation?

This webinar will facilitate dialogue on these and related questions.  A panel of key negotiation participants and observers will lead off, and then the rest of the session will be devoted to open conversation among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Omar Bitar is a Senior Policy Advisor at Global Affairs Canada, where he advises on Canada’s foreign policy on the global governance of digital technologies like artificial intelligence. Omar was part of the Canadian delegation that negotiated the Council of Europe Framework Convention. He previously served as Policy Advisor at the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, where he led a review of Canada’s Directive on Automated Decision-Making.  (Canada)

Christabel Randolph is Associate Director at the Center for AI and Digital Policy, where she oversees the US law and policy group and coordinates statements to Congressional committees and federal agencies. She led the organization's efforts with the Federal Trade Commission to establish guardrails for AI services. Before joining the Center, she held leadership positions across Asia-Pacific and the Middle East. She is a licensed attorney before the Supreme Court of Bangladesh with more than a decade of experience in the law and technology field.  (USA)

Thomas Schneider is Ambassador and Director of International Affairs at the Swiss Federal Office of Communications in the Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications.  He served as the Chair of the Council of Europe’s Committee on AI that negotiated the AI Convention.  Schneider also was the Vice-Chair of the OECD's Committee for Digital Economy Policy from 2020 to 2022 and the Chair of ICANN's Government Advisory Committee from 2014 to 2018.  He has represented Switzerland in a number of international fora related to digital governance, and has been a co-coordinator of the European IGF since 2008.  (Switzerland)

The explosive growth of online disinformation has elicited worldwide concern and calls for action over the past decade.  Attention to its potential effects has been particularly acute in 2024 because of the US presidential election and the other national elections being held in over 70 countries with almost half of the world’s population.  In recent years, policymakers and others have increasingly focused on the promotion of "information integrity" as a possible antidote to disinformation and related challenges. At the same time, some advocates for the freedom of expression have been highly critical of restrictive policy responses to disinformation.   However, governments have cooperated to establish international norms and mechanisms in order to address the transnational nature of the perceived problem.   For example, the European Union established a co-regulatory Code of Practice on Disinformation; thirty-two mostly industrialized countries endorsed a Global Declaration on Information Integrity Online; the Group of 20 released a ministerial statement noting the relevance of information integrity; and the UN General Assembly issued resolutions and reports on countering disinformation.  In addition, the UN Secretary General proposed the establishment of a global Code of Conduct for Information Integrity on Digital Platforms and ultimately released a set of Global Principles for Information Integrity.  Other UN and multilateral processes have addressed the issues in varying ways, and private sector and multistakeholder groupings also have pursued collaborative responses.  Free speech organizations have also weighed in.   

This webinar will delve into this issue nexus in two steps.  First, we will consider whether and how online disinformation has evolved due to technological, economic and political change, and whether the promotion of "information integrity" provides a path toward an improved infosphere, or towards global restrictiveness.  Second, we will explore whether international agreements can make a difference; their potential benefits and risks for human rights in a geopolitical landscape populated with illiberal regimes and movements; and the prospects for compliance with international norms by the disinformation creators and the distribution platforms.

This webinar will facilitate dialogue on these and related questions.  A panel of leading experts on the topic will lead off, then the rest of the session will be devoted to open conversation among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Guy Berger is Professor Emeritus of Journalism and Media Studies at Rhodes University and a Distinguished Research Fellow at Research ICT Africa.  For eleven years he was a Senior Director at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, where he oversaw work on global communications and information policy and regulation.  He recently was the lead author of two issue briefs on information integrity for the Group of 20.  (South Africa)

Maria Paz Canales is Co-Head of Policy and Advocacy at Global Partners Digital, a social purpose company working to enable a digital environment underpinned by human rights.  Previously, she co-founded and served as Executive Director at Derechos Digitales, one of the first digital rights organizations in Latin America. She holds a Master’s Degree with specialization in Law and Technology from the University of California, Berkeley.  (France)  

Jeanette Hofmann is Professor of Digital Policy at the Freie Universität Berlin. She is one of the founding directors of the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), head of the research group Politics of Digitalization at Berlin Social Science Center (WZB), and Principal Investigator of the research group Technology, Power and Domination at the Weizenbaum Institute of the networked society in Berlin.  (Germany)

Governments assembled at the United Nations' September 2024 Summit of the Future adopted a Pact for the Future that pledges "a new beginning in multilateralism" and to "transform global governance."  Annexed to the Pact is a Global Digital Compact intended to apply these general aspirations to global digital governance.   The Pact and its digital annex have been described by the UN and some others as achieving desperately needed reforms that strengthens the UN's ability to help manage both longstanding global challenges and new issues raised by the information revolution.  In the digital sphere, this includes nods to the importance of multistakeholder input, the launch of new collaborations on artificial intelligence and other issues, and the creation of a New York office charged with leading UN system-wide coordination of digital cooperation.

The time is ripe to assess what was achieved by the Pact and its digital annex, how the agreement may be implemented, and what it could mean for the future.  Does it point to a transformative new beginning for digital multilateralism?  Can its institutional innovations overcome the geopolitical tensions and rivalries that have confounded so many previous digital governance efforts in the UN? How will the new arrangements mesh with the digital policy work underway in UN specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations?  How might they impact key processes that have more multistakeholder support, like the upcoming reviews of the World Summit on the Information Society agreements and the Internet Governance Forum's mandate?  Will the UN New York begin to accommodate meaningful multistakeholder participation in its efforts? 

This webinar will facilitate open dialogue on these and related questions.  A panel of expert participants in global digital governance processes will lead off.  The rest of the session will be devoted to a conversation among all interested attendees.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School. 

Panelists

Fiona M. Alexander is both Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence in the School of International Service and Distinguished Fellow at the Internet Governance Lab at American University.  Previously, for close to 20 years, she served at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in the U.S. Department of Commerce where she was Associate Administrator for International Affairs.  (USA)

Anriette Esterhuysen is Senior Advisor for Internet Governance at the Association for Progressive Communications (APC).  Previously she was the APC’s Executive Director from 2000 until April 2017, and served as Chair of the IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group from 2019 to 2021.  Anriette was inducted into the Internet Hall of Fame in 2013.  (South Africa)

Wolfgang Kleinwächter is Professor Emeritus of International Communication Policy and Regulation at the University of Aarhus. He was a member of ICANN’s Board of Directors, served as Special Ambassador for the NETmundial Initiative, is the founder and Chair of the European Summer School on Internet Governance, and was a member of the Global Commission on Stability in Cyberspace and of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance.  (Germany)

Register Here

On April 1st, the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Technology released the ‘Zero Draft’ of the proposed United Nations Global Digital Compact (GDC).  The final text will be annexed to the Pact for the Future to be adopted at the Summit of the Future in New York on 22-23 September 2024.  The preparatory process involved multiple UN reports, proposals and consultations about global digital governance and cooperation.  Some of these proposals got support, while others have proven to be highly controversial forays into sensitive policy spaces in which the international community is often deeply divided.  The resulting Zero Draft reflects these dynamics. It includes proposals for new organizational structures and policy processes on such issues as artificial intelligence, digital public infrastructure, digital human rights, connectivity, information integrity, crossborder data flows and the system-wide coordination of UN digital work. On April 5^th, the UN commences a series of intergovernmental and stakeholder consultations to help evolve a final text that can serve as a consensus landing zone.

How are the hot button issues reflected in the Zero Draft?  Does the document suggest a different interplay between intergovernmental decision-making and multistakeholder participation?  How might the proposed enhanced roles of the Secretariat in New York impact existing UN organizations and processes, including the Internet Governance Forum?  Are the proposed new mechanisms likely to be fit for purpose and serve as effective responses to the rapidly evolving global environment?  Or could these mechanisms be hobbled by the same international political differences and dynamics that have confounded previous global digital governance initiatives?  

This webinar assembles a panel of leading experts from the private sector, Internet technical community and civil society stakeholder groups to consider these and other questions.  As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all webinar participants.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.  

Panelists

Chris Buckridge is an independent consultant, an Internet technical community representative on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Multistakeholder Advisory Group, Co-Chair of the MAG Working Group on Strategy and Strengthening the IGF, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Previously he worked for more than two decades with the Regional Internet Registries including the Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) and the Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC).  (Netherlands)

Anriette Esterhuysen is Senior Advisor for Internet Governance at the Association for Progressive Communications (APC).  Previously she was the APC’s Executive Director from 2000 until April 2017, and served as Chair of the IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group from 2019 to 2021.  Anriette was inducted into the Internet Hall of Fame in 2013.  (South Africa)

Timea Suto is Global Digital Policy Lead at the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). She leads ICC’s policy development and advocacy work on digital policy and Internet governance issues and works with global business experts to bring private sector views into international multilateral and multistakeholder processes. Previously she served as policy analyst for projects in the Visegrad countries and has had research and teaching roles in Budapest and Paris. (France)

Register here

The World Trade Organization is struggling to respond to the proliferation of national restrictions and trade barriers in the global digital economy. The largely failed 13th Ministerial Conference that concluded on March 2, 2024 barely managed in its last hour to extend the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions until 2026. The 90-member Joint Service Initiative launched in 2017 has been unable to finalize a negotiating text even after dropping or indefinitely pausing work on its most important but contentious issues. These include: barriers to cross-border data flows, forced data localization, forced disclosure of source code, the non-discriminatory treatment of digital products, and online platforms, among others. A key factor in this downsizing of ambitions was the US government’s extremely contentious October 2023 decision to reverse its longstanding push for strong disciplines on such items. If the negotiations ultimately produce a result, it may be more the kind of minimalist trade facilitation agreement favored by China rather than the sort of ambitious liberalization deal previously championed by the United States.

What are the prospects for global digital trade negotiations in the years ahead?  What would a minimalist outcome mean for the growth of territorial borders on global flows, and Internet fragmentation?  Would the sidelining of inclusive multilateral institutions further strengthen the trend toward a spaghetti bowl of varying minilateral trade deals that exclude much of the developing world?  Is a sharper geopolitical clash between diverging models of digital capitalism becoming likely?

This webinar assembles a panel of leading experts on global digital trade policy to consider these and other questions. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all webinar participants.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School. 

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.

Panelists

Mira Burri is Professor of International Economic and Internet Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Lucerne. She is the principal investigator of the ‘Trade Law 4.0’ project, and was previously a senior fellow at the World Trade Institute, University of Bern. She is the co-author of The Classification of Services in the Digital Economy and the editor of Trade Governance in the Digital Age and Big Data and Global Trade Law.(Switzerland)

Anupam Chander is the Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Law and Technology at Georgetown Law School. He was previously the Director of the California International Law Center and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Professor of Law at UC Davis. He is the author The Electronic Silk Road: How the Web Binds the World in Commerce, and the co-editor of Data Sovereignty: From the Digital Silk Road to the Return of the State. (USA)

Martina F. Ferracane is a Research Fellow at the European University Institute in Florence and academic manager of the Digital Trade Integration Project. She acts regularly as a consultant for several organizations, including the United Nations, the World Economic Forum and the World Bank. Martina also founded and manages FabLab Western Sicily and was listed in Forbes30U30 for her work with an innovative startup. (Italy)

In December 2019, the UN General Assembly approved on a 79-60 vote (with 33 abstentions) a resolution calling for the negotiation of a comprehensive international convention on cybercrime. Sponsored by Russia with support from China, Iran and other like-minded countries, the resolution established an Ad Hoc Committee (AHC) charged with elaborating a text. The AHC held six sessions in 2022 and 2023 and will have a concluding session from January 29 to February 9, 2024 in New York. The draft treaty will then be taken up by the UN General Assembly in September.

The treaty’s ardent proponents maintain that existing intergovernmental mechanisms like the 2001 Budapest Convention on Cybercrime are inadequate, and that a stronger and more broadly scoped UN mechanism is needed to tackle the evolving landscape of cybercrime. The treaty’s critics counter that the draft text is far too expansive (and indeed goes beyond cybercrime), criminalizes an arbitrary laundry list of speech and behavior, undermines multiple civil liberties, unduly constrains technology providers and users, and promotes extraterritorial surveillance and mutual law enforcement procedures that could extend the reach of repressive policing. Other governments have taken various positions along the continuum between these polar stances.

Convened a week before the final AHC negotiation, this webinar assembles a panel of leading analysts and participants in the cybercrime treaty debate in order to illuminate the state of play. We will assess the major issues with the draft text, the international coalitions and bargaining dynamics that are shaping the process, and the possible scenarios for a negotiated outcome in the months ahead. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all webinar participants.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator  

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.

Panelists

Nick Ashton-Hart is the Senior Director for Digital Economy Policy at APCO Worldwide. He participates in the UN cybercrime convention negotiations as the Head of Delegation of the Cybersecurity Tech Accord, a coalition of over 150 companies. Nick also participates in other international organization processes, including as a member of UK delegations to the International Telecommunication Union. (USA)

Katitza Rodriguez has been the Global Privacy Policy Director of the Electronic Frontiers Foundation since April 2010. In 2018, CNET named her one of the top 20 most influential Latinos in tech. Previously, Katitza directed the international privacy program at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. (USA)

Tatiana Tropina is Assistant Professor in cybersecurity governance at the Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University. She is a co-chair of the Freedom Online Coalition Advisory Network, and has held various leadership position at ICANN community. Previously, Tatiana was a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law. (Netherlands)

A full transcipt can be found here

In April 2014, Brazil hosted the NETmundial Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance in São Paulo. Held after a substantial online preparatory consultation, the meeting brought together over 1200 participants from governments and stakeholder groups to adopt a NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement that advanced guiding principles and a roadmap for the future evolution of Internet governance. The NETmundial strengthened international support for multistakeholder cooperation at a very difficult moment that was shaped by the Edward Snowden revelations, divisive Internet negotiations in the United Nations, and the US government’s planned transition of its authority over critical Internet resources to the global community.

On November 23, 2023 the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) announced that Brazil will convene a NETmundial +10 meeting in São Paulo in the Spring of 2024. The stated objectives include reviewing and renewing international commitments to the NETmundial principles and strategic agenda, and debating the role of multistakeholder participation in today’s even more heatedly divided geopolitical environment. The prospective meeting is stimulating discussion around the world and in the new year will likely reanimate the wide-ranging debates about the roles of states and stakeholders and the balance between multistakeholder and intergovernmental cooperation in global Internet governance.

This webinar assembles a panel of veteran expert participants in global Internet governance for an initial open global discussion of the NETmundial+10 meeting. We will begin with an update from the Coordinator of CGI.br on the thinking and planning behind this initiative, and then undertake a critical assessment and brainstorming on how the international community can learn from the previous experience, leverage the opportunity and manage the inevitable challenges. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all webinar participants.

Moderator  

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School. In 2014 he organized the book, Beyond NETmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the Global Internet Governance Ecosystem, and at the 2019 Internet Governance Forum he organized a stocktaking session on the NETmundial+5.

Panelists

Avri Doria is an independent researcher and consultant. She has served on the Board of Directors and chaired the GNSO Council of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), and has been a member of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance, the UN Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation, and the Multistakeholder Advisory Group of the Internet Governance Forum. In the technical community, Doria is a new member of the Internet Engineering Task Force’s Ombudsteam and has been chair of the Internet Research Task Force’s Routing Research Group and founder and co-chair of the Research Group on Human Rights Protocol Considerations. (USA)

Wolfgang Kleinwächter is Professor Emeritus of International Communication Policy and Regulation at the University of Aarhus. He was a member of ICANN’s Board of Directors, served as Special Ambassador for the NETmundial Initiative, is the founder and Chair of the European Summer School on Internet Governance, and was a member of the Global Commission on Stability in Cyberspace and of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance. (Germany)

Renata Mielli is the Coordinator of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) and a special adviser to the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Previously she has been a journalist and has twenty-five years of experience working on communication and digital rights. In addition, Renata is currently a PhD student in the School of Communications and Arts, University of São Paulo. (Brazil)

A full transcript can be found here

On October 25, the US government set off positive and negative shock waves in the world of digital and trade policy by announcing the abandonment of its longstanding advocacy of ambitious negotiations for digital trade. Until last week, the United States had been the leading proponent of strong trade rules that would curtail governments’ restrictions on cross-border data flows and their requirements of forced data localization and access to source code as a condition of foreign firms doing business in their countries. Difficult negotiations on these points have been underway in multiple settings including the World Trade Organization’s Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E-Commerce, and in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF). The US policy reversal has thus greatly dismayed like-minded governments, business interests, and trade analysts who advocate international regimes that promote openness in the global digital economy. Conversely, the decision has been warmly welcomed by opposing governments and civil society organizations, and by critics of Big Tech in the US Congress.

Why did the United States reverse a long-standing position that has been central to its posture as a global leader in international trade policy?  Who benefits and what is gained or lost by the shift?  How will this affect current and future trade negotiations? What could the new US posture mean for the future evolution and governance of the global digital and Internet environments?

This webinar assembles a panel of expert analysts to assess the causes and consequences of the new US approach to digital trade negotiations. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all webinar participants.

Introduction of the topic

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator 

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School. 

Panelists

Nigel Cory is an Associate Director covering Trade Policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. He focuses on cross-border data flows, data governance, intellectual property, and how they each relate to digital trade and the broader digital economy. Nigel is a member of the United Kingdom’s International Data Transfer Expert Council. (USA)

Jonathan McHale is Vice President for Digital Trade at the Computer & Communications Industry Association. He engages with U.S. and foreign governments in seeking to remove barriers to digital commerce through the development, negotiation and enforcement of international trade rules. Previously, he spent two decades at the Office of the US Trade Representative and the Department of State where he focused on telecommunications and digital policy. (USA)

Lee Tuthill is a visiting Fellow at the University of Adelaide’s Institute for International Trade in Australia. From 1990 to 2021, she worked at the World Trade Organization where she was a senior expert supporting negotiations on the General Agreement on Trade in Services, telecommunications/ICT services, emerging technologies and global digital trade. (USA)

A full transcript can be found here

Digital Economy Agreements and Digital Partnerships are new approaches to international cooperation and policy convergence. Governments from the Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Europe have established a handful of these arrangements since 2020, and more are in negotiation. They use  modular architectures to treat individual issues separately within an integrated framework. Modular approaches allow policymakers a much greater flexibility and avoids the ‘all or nothing’ negotiation dynamics that often impede progress in trade and other negotiations.

The arrangements have institutionalized cooperation on many difficult issues: transparency, supply chains, inclusion, identities, cross-border data flows, forced data localization, online customs duties and the trade treatment of digital products, business and trade facilitation, e-invoicing and certifications, the protection of source code, cybersecurity, consumer protection, privacy and data protection, open government data, standards and interoperability, fintech and e-payments, innovation and regulatory sandboxes, artificial intelligence and support for small and medium-sized firms. 

Outstanding questions are how impactful they can be, and whether more major digital countries will pursue them. China is seeking to join a key one. And the United States is centrally involved in parallel initiatives that have some commonalities, e.g. the digital work streams of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Technology Council. 

This webinar assembles a panel of expert analysts to assess these new institutional frameworks and consider their potential for the future of digital cooperation and governance. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all participants.

Introduction

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia Business School.

Moderator

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.

Panelists

Neha Mishra is an Assistant Professor at Geneva Graduate Institute. She was previously a lecturer at the Australian National University College of Law and a postdoctoral fellow at the Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore. She researches international legal issues in the digital economy, focusing on international economic law, data flows and digital trade, and the interface of trade law and emerging digital technologies. (Switzerland)

Richard Samans is Director of the International Labor Organization’s Research Department and has been its sherpa to the G20, G7 and BRICS processes. He was Founder and Chairman of the Climate Disclosure Standards Board, a Managing Director of the World Economic Forum and Director-General of the Global Green Growth Institute. He served as Special Assistant to the President for International Economic Policy and NSC Senior Director for International Economic Affairs in the second Clinton Administration, and as economic policy advisor to US Senate Democratic Leader Thomas A. Daschle. (Switzerland)

Marta Soprana is a Fellow in International Political Economy at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She has extensive experience working with international organizations – including FAO, ITC, UNCTAD, UNESCAP, World Bank and WTO – and national governments on trade policy-related projects. Her research interests include digital trade, trade in services, law and technology, with a focus on the relationship between AI governance and international economic law. (United Kingdom)

Stephanie Honey is a trade policy consultant, focusing on digital trade, regional economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region, and inclusion and sustainability in trade. She was formerly a New Zealand WTO trade negotiator, and currently serves as Lead Staffer to the New Zealand members of the APEC Business Advisory Council and Trade Policy Adviser to the New Zealand Asia Institute at the University of Auckland, alongside consultancy work for governments, international institutions and the private sector. (New Zealand)

Real Time Text Transcript: https://otter.ai/u/S1_tSm6PP40cSVu2Yg_mEA7ApCk?tab=summary

On June 5, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres presented a policy brief on his Global Digital Compact initiative to the General Assembly. Among the brief’s ideas is a proposal to create an annual Digital Cooperation Forum (DCF). This new UN forum would not be a negotiation body, but would instead foster action-oriented dialogue and analysis concerning international cooperation on digital policy issues. A proposal like this has been anticipated since the SG’s High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation issued its report in 2019. The case for a DCF is being championed in particular by the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology. The proposal has yet to garner support but will be discussed by a ministerial meeting in September 2023 that is to help prepare the groundwork for the UN’s 2024 Summit of the Future.

The policy brief states that the DCF would coexist with existing bodies and processes like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in an integrated hub and spoke system. However, aside from its presumably broader scope, in many respects the DCF appears to duplicate the IGF. Given that the IGF has long faced challenges from those governments that are unhappy with its multistakeholder character, the existence of a comparatively intergovernmental DFC could complicate the renewal of the IGF’s mandate at the 2025 WSIS+20 review. In addition, there are a number of other issues raised by proposing a new forum without specifying its substantive focus and institutional modalities or assessing the demand for one. The experiences over the past twenty years with failed proposals to create new institutions for global Internet and digital governance merits consideration in this context.

An inclusive dialogue is needed to determine whether the DCF vision can overcomes the potential barriers to its realization or at least contribute to strengthening international cooperation in other settings. To help with that task, this webinar assembles a panel of expert participants in the debate about the United Nations’ role in global digital cooperation and governance. The group will assess the driving issues and interests, potential negotiation dynamics and outcomes, and larger digital governance implications of the DCF proposal.

As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all participants.

Introduction:

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information 

Moderator:

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information 

Panelists:

Fiona M. Alexander is both Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence in the School of International Service and Distinguished Fellow at the Internet Governance Lab at American University. Previously, for close to 20 years, she served at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in the U.S. Department of Commerce where she was Associate Administrator for International Affairs. (USA)

Anriette Esterhuysen is Senior Advisor for Internet Governance at the Association for Progressive Communications (APC). She was APC’s Executive Director from 2000 until April 2017, and served as Chair of the IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group from 2019 to 2021. Anriette was inducted into the Internet Hall of Fame in 2013. (South Africa)

Nigel Hickson works on Internet Governance at the United Kingdom’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) where, among other roles, he is the UK representative on the Government Advisory Committee at ICANN. From 2012 he worked for ICANN in Brussels and Geneva before returning to the UK government in 2020 to work on Brexit-related data protection issues. (UK)

Real time text transcript:  https://otter.ai/u/7msJLBwTSwjC9FftMTqGzH_rFxI?tab=summary

The many issues raised by social media platforms have stimulated calls for new governance mechanisms. Some platforms have responded by establishing self-governance systems like oversight boards, and some governments and regional bodies like the European Union have responded with laws and regulations, in particular for the largest platforms. At the multilateral level several initiatives are underway, in particular the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) effort to develop Guidelines for Regulating Digital Platforms. The Guidelines are intended to promote regulations that both support freedom of expression and deal with content that is illegal and risks harm to democracy and human rights. A draft was debated at UNESCO’s February 2023 Internet for Trust conference. 

In the course of this process, stakeholders have raised a wide range of concerns. Some have argued that:

• The need for UN-created guidelines has not been demonstrated;
• The process has been inadequately inclusive and transparent;
• The scope of entities covered and the respective roles and responsibilities of relevant actors are unclear;
• The intended creation of regulatory agencies and frameworks and their treatment of potentially harmful content are problematic;
• The inattention to competition policy, privacy and data protection, and business models based on data harvesting is severely limiting;
• Above all, that the guidelines, despite good intentions, could provide international legitimacy and support for nondemocratic governments seeking to penalize and suppress a wide variety of speech.

This webinar assembles a panel of leading expert participants in the UNESCO debate and related discussions. The group will assess the driving issues and interests, negotiation dynamics, potential outcomes and larger digital governance implications.

As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an extensive and open dialogue among all participants.

Introduction

Eli Noam is Paul Garrett Professor of Public Policy and Business Responsibility, Professor of Finance and Economics, emeritus, and the Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Moderator and Organizer

William J. Drake is Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and Adjunct Professor, Columbia Business School

Panelists

Alison Gillwald is the Executive Director of Research ICT Africa (RIA), a digital policy and regulatory think-tank based in South Africa. She is also an adjunct professor at the University of Cape Town’s Nelson Mandela School of Public Governance. (South Africa)

David Kaye is Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the International Justice Clinic at the University of California, Irvine. He is also Chair of the Board of Directors of the Global Network Initiative, a multistakeholder initiative that brings together 85 leading businesses, NGOs, and academics. From 2014 to 2020, he served as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression. (USA)  

Laura O’Brien is Senior UN Advocacy Officer at Access Now, an NGO that advocates for the digital civil rights and organizes the annual RightsCon Convention. Previously, Laura engaged in strategic litigation support, including at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and for human rights organizations, clinics, and experts including two U.N. Special Rapporteurs. (USA)

Real Time Text Transcript: https://otter.ai/u/xGdWHd4dSsJZ1f7Fz0v4FIdryNY

The peering and transit model of interconnection has been a key building block for the Internet’s spectacular growth. But over the past decade, the major European telecommunications carriers have sought to move the EU toward a system under which the major content suppliers would be required to pay them volume-based fees for delivering content to their customers. The telcos argue that accommodating today’s explosive growth in network usage, especially for video on demand, requires broadband investments that they cannot afford to make without receiving mandatory payments from ‘Big Content’ originators. Accordingly, they have pushed at both the multilateral and regional levels for legally required ‘fair compensation’ by these originators for the use of their networks. The European Commission has welcomed this proposal in the context of its far-reaching Digital Agenda that has emphasized industrial policy and the regulation of US-based tech giants in the name of building Europe’s ‘digital sovereignty.’ In time, such fees also could target emerging data-intensive domains like the metaverse.

In response, the European telecom regulators and some other governmental entities, corporate suppliers and users, industry associations, the Internet technical community, civil society organizations, and others have mobilized against the telcos’ proposal. The critics argue that the proposal constitutes a Sending-Party-Network-Pays (SPNP) system that is contrary to the traditional peering model; content providers already invest heavily in infrastructure build-outs and the telcos are already adequately compensated by their customers; the mandated compensation could negatively affect many actors beyond Big Content; the proposal is contrary to network neutrality and would require further regulations that could favor incumbent carriers; and that an EU shift to SPNP could ripple across the global Internet. Amidst this heated debate over whether the telco proposal constitutes ‘fair compensation’ or rather an ‘Internet Traffic Tax,’ the EC is running until May 19 an online open consultation on electronic infrastructure in advance of considering legislation.

This webinar, by the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information, assembles a panel of leading expert participants in the raging debate. The group will lay out the merits of the respective arguments; assess the compatibility of SPNP with other policy frameworks and objectives; discuss alternative options for funding broadband rollouts and digital transformation; and in particular, consider the potential implications of EU adoption for the global Internet environment and digital governance.

As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all participants.

Introduction

Eli Noam, Paul Garrett Professor, Emeritus, and Director of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Moderator

William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Roundtable Panelists

Rudolf van der Berg is a Partner at Stratix Consulting. Previously, he was a regulatory affairs manager at Tele2, a senior policy advisor at the OECD, a management consultant at Logica Management Consulting, and a policy manager at the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs. (Netherlands)

Michael Kende is a Senior Advisor for Analysys Mason consulting and a digital development specialist with the World Bank Group. Previously he was the Chief Economist at the Internet Society, and a Visiting Lecturer at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies. (Switzerland)

Maarit Palovirta is the Senior Director for Regulatory Affairs at the European Telecommunications Network Operators'​ Association, ETNO. Previously she held manager roles at the Internet Society and Cisco Systems and worked in well-known Brussels based consultancies. (Belgium)

In 2023, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) celebrates the 25th anniversary of its founding and the 7th anniversary of its transition to independence from the United States government. The 2016 transition ended the contract under which ICANN performed the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions subject to US government stewardship; created a free-standing organization that is accountable primarily to its multistakeholder community; and constituted a significant change in the international regime for Internet names and numbers. In light of its dual anniversaries, it is timely to take stock of ICANN’s progress as a unique global governance mechanism that manages functions essential to the global digital economy and society.

This webinar takes up the challenge by assembling a panel of leading experts who have been deeply involved in ICANN processes. The group will consider such questions as: the transition’s geopolitical, interest group, and institutional consequences; the implementation of ICANN’s accountability framework and of Public Technical Identifiers, the ICANN affiliate created to manage the IANA functions (most notably coordination of the Internet's unique identifiers); the challenges ICANN and its community have faced in responding to new pressures from technological change, industry demands, and government policies; ICANN’s role and engagement in the wider global Internet governance ecosystem; and the lessons of its experience for the future of multistakeholder cooperation in global Internet and digital governance.

Moderator

William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Roundtable Panelists

Olga Cavalli, National Director of Cybersecurity in the Chief of Cabinet of the President of Argentina, and former Undersecretary of Information Technology and advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Argentina)

James Gannon, Chair of the Board of Directors of Public Technical Identifiers, and Vice President of Quality, Trust & Safety at the PharmaLedger Association (Ireland)

Milton Mueller, Professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology’s School of Public Policy, and Director of the School's Internet Governance Project (USA)

Realtime Text: https://otter.ai/u/kyA3D4GkEyuwHeQsDCH7vwdIr8k 

Since its inauguration in 2006, the UN’s Internet Governance Forum (IGF) has become a key component of the institutional ecosystem of global Internet governance. But while the annual meetings and intersessional activities generally enjoy strong support from their participants, there continues to be heated debate as to whether the IGF is living up to potential and fulfilling the mandate given it by the UN’s World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). For example, many states and stakeholders are content to have the IGF serve as a non-negotiation space for inclusive multistakeholder dialogue and an incubator or platform for bottom-up initiatives on capacity building and norm development. But many others insist that the IGF must do more to attract engagement from developing country governments and to produce “concrete outcomes” that can help tackle the growing range of policy challenges raised by the Internet and advanced technologies. And in addition to these and other long-standing points of contention, there are new debates about whether the IGF should serve as a vehicle for a broadened range of global digital cooperation efforts, as well as its role and prospects in light of the UN’s Global Digital Compact initiative and the pending WSIS +20 review.

Convened in the wake of the IGF’s meeting in Addis Ababa, this webinar brings together a panel of experts who have been closely involved in the IGF’s organization and activities from its beginning. The group will consider such questions as the IGF’s historical evolution and reform, relationship with the UN system, fit with the contending interests and visions of states and stakeholders, substantive and procedural impacts on Internet governance, outcomes, and future prospects. As always, the panelists’ conversation will be followed by an open dialogue among all participants.

Moderator

William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Roundtable Panelists

Raúl Echeberría, Executive Director of ALAI, the Latinamerican Internet Association (Uruguay)

Anriette Esterhuysen, Senior Advisor for Internet Governance, the Association for Progressive Communications (South Africa)

Adam Peake, Senior Manager for Civil Society Engagement, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (the Netherlands)

Flávio Rech Wagner,  Emeritus Professor in the Institute of Informatics, the University of Rio Grande do Sul in Porto Alegre (Brazil)

Realtime Text: https://otter.ai/u/As13JAff4VGO3ljgHujxeG-YrOg

What exactly does “Internet fragmentation” really mean, and how does the way we define and conceptualize the term affect the lines of action undertaken in response?  A diversity of views is evident in the burgeoning global debate and growing number of pronouncements by states and stakeholders on Internet fragmentation. For example, some participants in the debates take a broad approach and see fragmentation as having technical, commercial and governmental sources and forms, which implies that actions may be needed in each of those domains. Others take a narrow approach that equates fragmentation with only government policy, which means the only attention needed is to that domain. Some participants see fragmentation as a continuously present condition that varies in form, intensity and impact over time and across domains of activity and the protocol stack, while others see it more in a totalized and binary manner – either the Internet is structurally fragmented at the root, or it is not fragmented at all. Some participants believe that mere differences in public policy orientation across countries or regions mean we now have multiple incompatible Internets, while others counter that such differences are simply a matter of there being one Internet with different zones of governance. And some participants believe fragmentation is a threat that requires concerted responses and new strategies, while others see it as a matter of difficulties that can be overcome, or even as a natural and unproblematic phenomenon. And so on --- there are many sources of difference in perspective about how fragmentation is understood and what sorts of actions by whom should be taken in consequence. 

This webinar seeks to help advance our thinking about these foundational questions. A panel of leading analysts and practitioners in the global Internet governance environment will discuss such topics as the nature, sources, forms, and consequences of Internet fragmentation, as well as the responses pursued by governments and stakeholders to date and going forward.

(On November 28 at 9:00 EDT / 14:00 UTC a follow-up session on these issues will be held as part of the UN’s annual Internet Governance Forum meeting in Addis Abada, where fragmentation will be an overarching thematic issue. https://intgovforum.org/en/content/igf-2022-day-0-event-68-understanding-internet-fragmentation-concepts-and-their) 

Moderator 
William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information  
Roundtable Panelists 
Vinton G. Cerf, Vice President and chief Internet evangelist, Google (USA) 
Eli M. Noam, Director, Columbia Institute for Tele-Information and Professor of Finance and Economics, Columbia Business School 
Andrew Sullivan, President and CEO of the Internet Society (Canada) 
Tatiana Tropina, Assistant Professor in Cybersecurity Governance, Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University, Netherlands (Netherlands) 
———— 
Related reading: 
William J. Drake, Vinton G. Cerf, and Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Internet Fragmentation: An Overview. The World Economic Forum, January 2016.
The Internet Society, Protecting the Internet  
Eli M. Noam, “Towards a Federated Internet”, InterMEDIA, vol. 41, no. 4, 2013.

On September 29 in Bucharest, delegates to the Plenipotentiary Conference of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) elected Doreen Bogdan-Martin to serve as the organization’s first female Secretary-General. In the run-up to the conference, many media outlets, think tanks and pundits characterized the election contest between a US and a Russian candidate as an epochal battle between good and evil that would somehow determine whether the Internet would be open or closed, democratic or controlled by dictators. Little attention has been given to significant Internet-related policy decisions that are being negotiated during the three-week conference, an event that takes place every four years. On some of these issues, the competing visions for the Internet of democracies and authoritarian regimes do loom large, but there are many other divisions—between proponents of state-led vs. industry-led development, the global North and South, regions, industry coalitions, and so on—that also will shape the resulting treaty instruments.

This webinar will convene just five days after the ITU Plenipotentiary ends. It will bring together expert attendees and close observers to analyze the conference’s potential implications for the Internet and its global governance. Against the backdrop of the long-standing geopolitical tensions between multistakeholder vs. multilateral as well as open vs. closed governance models, the webinar will assess the ITU’s debates and negotiations on such issues as: the Internet resolutions, the International Telecommunications Regulations treaty, the follow-up to the World Summit on the Information Society, the work of the Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy, cybersecurity, the treatment of “over the top” services and Internet traffic exchange, the Chinese proposal for a “new Internet Protocol,” and more.

Moderator

William J. Drake, Director of International Studies at the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information

Roundtable Panelists 
Samantha Dickinson  
Internet Governance Consultant and Writer (Australia) 
Nermine El Saadany  
Regional Vice President, MENA Region, The Internet Society (Egypt) 
Wolfgang Kleinwaechter 
Professor Emeritus, International Communciation Policy and Regulation, University of Aarhus (Germany)