NETMundial+10

Contributor: Thobias Prado Moura, Internet Society - Brazil Chapter

Stakeholder Group

Country

I - PRINCIPLES FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE PROCESSES

I - A) THE 2014 NETMUNDIAL PROCESS PRINCIPLES

1. The 2014 NETmundial meeting adopted a set of 10 Principles for Internet Governance Processes. In light of the rapid technical, social, and economic evolutions that have taken place since then, please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

The 10 “NETmundial Internet Governance Process Principles” adopted in 2014 remain relevant to address today’s digital governance challenges

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Our persistent difficulties in dealing with digital issues largely stem from insufficient inclusion of all relevant stakeholders in policy discussions

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Our persistent difficulties in dealing with digital issues reflect different interests, priorities and value systems of distinct stakeholders

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

2. After reviewing the set of Principles for Internet Governance Processes from NETmundial 2014, do you think they need to be supplemented, in order to guide the development of the governance of the digital world? Please detail.

The principles that have been established serve as a strong foundation for Internet governance. However, due to the fast-paced evolution of the digital landscape, there is a need for further refinement to address specific contemporary issues. While maintaining the core values, a more focused approach is necessary to address concerns such as digital sovereignty, risks related to advancements such as AI, and the problem of excessive surveillance.

It is essential to acknowledge nations' legitimate desires for control over their digital domains while preventing actions that could break up the internet. Preserving its global nature as a shared resource is of utmost importance. In addition, the issue of excessive surveillance poses a significant threat to privacy and human rights. It is essential to reaffirm privacy rights under international human rights law and to implement clear limitations on surveillance practices.

Furthermore, the emergence of technologies like AI presents opportunities and risks. Integrating human rights and ethical considerations into AI development is critical to prevent discrimination and bias. Collaborative efforts among stakeholders, including researchers, developers, policymakers, and civil society, can promote responsible innovation.

To address these challenges, we recommend:

Foster open and inclusive dialogues among diverse stakeholders to address emerging challenges collaboratively;

Establish clear ethical guidelines and principles for the development and deployment of new technologies, ensuring they are aligned with human rights, promote social good, and avoid perpetuating bias or discrimination;

Encourage the adoption of open standards and interoperable technologies to prevent fragmentation of the internet and maintain its global reach;

Ensure that national policies and regulations related to digital sovereignty adhere to international human rights law and do not unduly restrict fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of expression and access to information.

I - B) STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBILITIES

3. The 2014 NETmundial statement includes the following “multistakeholder” Internet Governance Process Principle: “The respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders should be interpreted in a flexible manner with reference to the issue under discussion”. The distribution of roles and responsibilities between stakeholders is an ongoing (and contentious) subject of debate. In this regard, please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Each stakeholder group has different roles and responsibilities, depending on the topic and phases of specific governance processes

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Most digital governance processes are applying the above mentioned “multistakeholder” principle

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

4. Do you see room for improvements in the implementation of the above mentioned “multistakeholder” principle? If yes, what would you suggest?

Multistakeholderism is supposed to represent the practice of incorporating the principles of Internet Governance into decision-making processes. Then, it must work  based on diverse stakeholders, leveraging the expertise and perspectives of all involved parties. Therefore, while flexibility is essential in adapting to the evolving digital landscape, it must not lead to the dominance of any single stakeholder group over others. Government-centric or private sector-driven approaches risk compromising the core principles of Multistakeholderism. 
It’s the collaborative spirit that fosters consensus-building and transparency, ensuring balanced decisions that considers the needs and rights of all stakeholders.This ensures equitable and sustainable solutions, unlike top-down approaches that can stifle innovation and limit participation. 
Recognizing the inherent biases in global governance models towards developed countries, initiatives like the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) stands out as a prime example due to its commitment to diversity and its bottom-up approach. This inclusive structure fosters greater participation from various stakeholders, including those often marginalized in global discussions. The CGI.br's success demonstrates that effective multi-stakeholder models can flourish and guarantee positive returns to society.
In order to discuss changes to the multistakeholder approach, it is important to consider the Internet ecosystem's ability to remain functional and coherent. The key to this consideration is Internet Governance; as stakeholders, while pursuing individual objectives, generally unite in preserving the Internet as a globally connected, open and secure platform. The central question revolves around how IG can adapt to incorporate all stakeholders without undermining the principles that have fostered the Internet's growth and stability thus far.
To address evolving challenges in IG, it's imperative to rebuild trust among stakeholders and actively involve youth communities. Engaging youth ensures representation and enhances their potential as present and future innovators. However, this involvement requires stricter responsibility and accountability to ensure fair participation. Recognizing they are equally leveled as other important actors means they should behave at the same standards as any other participant, avoiding more lenient perspectives due to less experience.

I - C) COORDINATION

5. Numerous initiatives and processes have emerged to address the broad diversity of issues raised by the digital revolution. Sometimes, multiple processes address the same issues in parallel. Please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Separate siloed discussions on a specific issue risk creating incompatible and even conflicting outcomes.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Distributed initiatives on a particular issue can help cover the diversity of approaches and perspectives.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Better coordination is needed between processes dealing with overlapping issues

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

6. If you believe better coordination is needed, please suggest ways to do so and specific text or language that could be included as recommendations in a NETmundial+10 outcome statement.

When addressing overlapping problems, it is crucial to recognize their interconnected nature. An intersectional methodology is necessary for effective solutions, acknowledging that diverse issues work in an intertwined manner. Then, it is essential to avoid universalizing concepts that overlook community-specific nuances, particularly between the Global South and Global North.

In Internet Governance, diverse stakeholders contribute varied perspectives, but the efforts must prioritize achieving consensus. It is necessary to organize and manage the participation of actors who implement the discussions raised in the events, such as telecommunications operators, Internet providers, among others. The involvement of technical experts alongside government and civil society ensures balanced decision-making.

Moreover, the current state of Internet governance faces a critical challenge: fragmentation. This also happens in the public debate arena. The ever-increasing number of discussions, initiatives, and decision-making spaces leads to information overload, hindering productive collaboration and ultimately weakening the multistakeholder model. To tackle this problem, better communication and collaboration are vital. This involves facilitating dialogue between communities, sharing best practices and promoting joint initiatives. Also, developing mechanisms for coordinating policy development would ensure coherence and consistency across different IG forums and initiatives, preventing conflicting approaches and duplication of efforts.

Finally, it is essential to strengthen existing institutions like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and enhancing transparency within bodies like ICANN. In this sense, there are concerns about the creation of new gTLDs as well as the best way to promote DNSSEC adoption will ensure the stability and security of the Internet's core infrastructure. Collaborative efforts between Regional Internet Registries to accelerate IPv6 deployment and address routing security issues are equally important. In addition to refining existing institutions, creating new mechanisms may be necessary, always looking to avoid the fragmentation of governance spaces. Finally, establishing funding mechanisms to support research, capacity building, and initiatives addressing fragmentation would provide the necessary resources for sustained progress.

There is broad consensus to support the multistakeholder approach, but little common or broadly-shared understanding about how to put it into practice. NETmundial+10 aims to help operationalize, through guidelines, principles and mechanisms, improvements for multistakeholder collaboration.

II - A) PARTICIPATION IN MULTILATERAL PROCESSES

7. Some multilateral processes offer the possibility for non-governmental stakeholders to contribute through consultations. However, these examples remain limited and there is often no transparency on how these inputs are taken into account in subsequent stages of discussions among States. Please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Since NETmundial 2014, opportunities for non-governmental stakeholders to participate in multilateral processes have been improved

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

More transparent mechanisms should be put in place regarding how input from non-governmental stakeholders is taken into account

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Relevant non-governmental stakeholders should be able to attend/observe multilateral negotiations on digital issues.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Relevant non-governmental stakeholders should be able to contribute in a meaningful way to multilateral negotiations on digital issues.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

8. Please suggest ways to improve meaningful participation of non-governmental stakeholders in multilateral processes and add specific text or language in that regard that could be included as recommendations in a NETmundial+10 outcome statement. If possible, please indicate examples you know of meaningful participation of stakeholders in multilateral-driven processes.

To truly harness the Internet's potential for global good, we must move beyond fragmented governance structures and embrace a future where all stakeholders have a voice. Meaningful participation of non-governmental actors in multilateral processes is a necessity, to avoid strong claim of sovereignty that may break the Internet as we know it.

This requires a concerted effort to formalize mechanisms for stakeholder engagement. Multilateral organizations should establish dedicated multistakeholder advisory bodies with clear mandates, ensuring diverse representation and the ability to provide input on policy development and implementation. Additionally, transparent and inclusive consultation processes, coupled with resources to support stakeholder participation, are vital to overcome barriers and foster genuine engagement. Investing in capacity building and skills development is equally important. Programs that enhance stakeholders' understanding of multilateral processes and Internet Governance issues, along with initiatives that cultivate local and regional expertise, will empower non-governmental actors to participate effectively on the global stage.

Moreover, multilateral processes must be open and accessible, with timely publication of relevant documents and clear communication channels for stakeholders to provide feedback. Mechanisms should be established to ensure that multilateral organizations are held accountable for their actions and responsive to stakeholder concerns. Meaningful engagement can manifest in various ways, from online and offline contributions to formal and informal interactions.

Finally, learning from successful examples like the IGF, the NetMundial 2014 and the ICANN multistakeholder model is essencial. The NETmundial+10 outcome statement should include clear calls to action. We must urge multilateral organizations to establish formalized mechanisms for stakeholder engagement, emphasizing inclusivity and transparency. Governments and other stakeholders should invest in capacity building and skills development initiatives, empowering non-governmental actors to participate effectively. Transparency and accountability must be prioritized, with mechanisms for feedback and organizational accountability firmly established.

II - B) GUIDELINES FOR MULTISTAKEHOLDER CONSENSUS-BUILDING AND DECISION-MAKING

Principles of open and inclusive multistakeholder collaboration in digital governance are scattered in various foundational documents and declarations. The characteristics enunciated below are distilled from some of those documents that deal with multistakeholder collaboration processes as well as from current good practices and experiences.

The aim here is to obtain feedback from the community as to the relevance of each of these characteristics, with a view to elaborating a sort of “gold standard” or “protocol of protocols” that may serve national, regional, and global communities to establish and develop multistakeholder collaboration processes and mechanisms, as well as to assess processes and mechanisms that are presented as being multistakeholder.

9. Please rank the relevance of the following guidelines in the order of importance in your view. Assign a number from 1 to 12 to each item, where 1 indicates the most important and 12 indicates the least important:

Multistakeholder processes should be accessible to all stakeholders, regardless of their background, status, or level of expertise.

Multistakeholder processes should empower stakeholders by providing them with the necessary information, resources, and skills to participate effectively.

Stakeholders should treat each other with mutual respect, recognizing the value of diverse viewpoints and contributions.

Multistakeholder processes should involve informed and deliberative discussion among stakeholders.

Stakeholders should share responsibility for the outcomes of the multistakeholder process.

Multistakeholder processes should be governed by the rule of law, with respect for constitutional principles, human rights, and legal frameworks.

Mechanisms for resolving conflicts among stakeholders should be in place to enable decision-making.

Digital governance processes should be flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances, evolving technologies, emerging issues, and changing geopolitical dynamics.

Decisions should consider the long-term implications and sustainability of outcomes.

Capacity-building efforts enhance understanding and skills of stakeholders, particularly those from developing countries and underrepresented communities.

Multistakeholder processes should strive to treat all stakeholders fairly and equitably, considering their respective needs, capacities, and vulnerabilities.

A global multistakeholder approach to digital governance should recognize the need for collaborative action across national borders and stakeholder groups.

10. Please identify up to three relevant items from the above list you consider are not being effectively implemented in current digital governance processes.