Session
Organizer 1: Nadia Tjahja, 🔒United Nations University - CRIS
Organizer 2: Chris Buckridge, Buckridge Consultants
Organizer 3: Jamal Shahin, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Speaker 1: Jenna Manhau Fung, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: Carolina Aguerre, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 3: Nibal Idlebi, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
Speaker 4: Markus Kummer, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Chris Buckridge, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Jamal Shahin, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Nadia Tjahja, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Classroom
Duration (minutes): 90
Format description: A classroom format allows participants in the room to see the speakers clearly, but also have table space to collaboratively work in the GoogleDoc. We ask for 90 minutes to spend time for each speaker provide insights of the speakers on their respective regions, for the speakers to comment and interact with each others insights and the contributions on the policy questions submitted to the GoogleDpc by on site and online audiences. This will take 60 minutes. We then have 30min for direct questions and comments from the audience for clarifications or further insights.
1) How relevant is the regional concept for understanding the IGF or the multistakeholder world? How is regional actorness evolving? 2) Will regions be building blocks for a new multilateralism or multistakeholderism? 3) For which policy challenges are regional organisations better equipped to tackle than international organisations like the UN?
What will participants gain from attending this session? This session will provide enhanced awareness about regionalism and its impact in shaping Internet Governance, fostering dialogue between regions and providing insights.
Description:
The evolution of what is broadly termed "Internet governance" has historically looked to the distributed nature of the Internet technology itself for inspiration and insight. From relatively early in the Internet's development, technical governance processes, like the Regional Internet Registries, have emphasised a regional approach, allowing local communities to develop policies suited to their specific circumstances and challenges, while maintaining global coordination on essential elements. Following the World Summit on the Information Society and the launch of the Internet Governance Forum, there emerged a vibrant network of national and regional Internet governance initiatives (NRIs) that embody this regional approach to the full spectrum of Internet governance issues. There are now more than 170 NRIs around the world, the majority of them in the Global South, defined by their multistakeholder, bottom-up approach. As explored in the recent 'Net Effects' paper by the DNS Research Federation, these structures provide local communities, whether geographic or linguistic, to discuss issues of priority to them and coordinate to influence governance approaches and decisions (including legislation) at the local, regional, and global level. At the same time, NRIs serve as a vital space to foster and develop new leaders and informed governance participants. As stakeholders have discussed the most recent proposals and developments in Internet governance, including a UN Global Digital Compact and the 20-year review of the WSIS, many have reiterated the importance of regional structures and the need to recognise and support their crucial role in global Internet governance.
This session seeks to engage in data collection and perspective exchange for a book proposal for the United Nations University Series on Regionalism
Hybrid Format: In the first hour of the panel, we will make a GoogleDoc available with the policy questions to the onsite and online participants, and encourage them to submit their own answers and examples to the questions. During the last thirty minutes, in the Q&A, we will open up the floor for comments and questions both on site and online. We will also make short interventions with summaries of the written contributions from the GoogleDoc for the panellists to reflect on.
Report
Regional action in the internet governance space means different things for different regions: some actors use regions to coordinate, other actors use regions to regulate. Regions can work as contiguous geographical units, but a different sort of regionalism also exists: that of states that share common socio-economic conditions
Regions share common challenges within themselves; they also have the benefit of common understandings and awareness of the power dynamics, which enables regions to be useful actors when developing approaches help adopt and implement global initiatives
We should not forget that internet governance requires a global baseline, and that regions can contribute toward this. The internet only works globally due to global coordination, which should not be pushed aside in support of regional approaches.
Think globally in a regional context! Regions are essential actors in the building up of global consensus on internet governance issues. They help build bottom-up approaches that can work, globally.
Think regionally in a global context! Regions are essential actors in implementing and supporting global initiatives (“top-down”).
This session report was written by the Geneva Internet Platform. The original publication can be found here:
https://dig.watch/event/internet-governance-forum-2024/ws-141-regionali…
"This discussion, moderated by Chris Buckridge, explored the evolving role of regionalism in Internet governance, with a particular focus on its relevance within the context of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). The panel, comprising experts from various regions and backgrounds, examined how regional approaches contribute to global Internet governance and their changing significance in an increasingly interconnected digital landscape.
Importance and Relevance of Regional Approaches
There was broad consensus among the speakers on the continued importance of regional approaches to Internet governance. Chris Buckridge highlighted that regional approaches address crucial logistical issues such as time zones, languages, and cultural differences. This sentiment was echoed by other panelists, who emphasized additional benefits of regionalism.
Nibal Idlebi, Acting Director at UNESCO, stressed that regionalism allows for capacity building and brings people into a deeper understanding of Internet governance. She argued that regional organizations are often better equipped to propose policies suited to local governance processes, as they have a more nuanced understanding of the specific challenges and priorities within their regions. Idlebi also shared insights from the Arab IGF experience, highlighting how governance processes can differ significantly between regions.
Jenna Manhau Fung, coordinator of the Asia-Pacific Youth Internet Governance Forum, pointed out that regional forums provide a vital platform for amplifying voices, especially for youth and developing countries. She highlighted the diversity within the Asia-Pacific region, noting the multitude of languages and cultures that necessitate a regional approach distinct from other areas. Fung emphasized the importance of regional approaches for youth engagement and capacity building in Asia-Pacific, discussing how these platforms offer opportunities for young people to develop leadership and policy skills.
Carolina Aguerre, a scholar and university professor, emphasized that the regional approach enables thought processes and development of digital infrastructure tailored to local needs. She noted a renewed interest in regional forums in Latin America and the Caribbean, possibly driven by geopolitical shifts and emerging technologies like AI governance. Aguerre also highlighted the lack of political and economic integration in Latin America and the Caribbean, explaining how this affects regional approaches to internet governance in the area.
Relationship Between Regional and Global Internet Governance
The discussion explored the complex relationship between regional and global Internet governance processes. Markus Kummer, a veteran of Internet governance with extensive experience in WSIS and other processes, pointed out that regional Internet registries complement the global ICANN governance structure. He also noted that regional solutions, such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), can sometimes become global standards.
Chris Buckridge emphasized that regional forums help strengthen voices in global discussions, providing a stepping stone for local actors to engage in broader Internet governance debates. Nibal Idlebi added that regional organizations can support member states in responding to global agendas, such as the Sustainable Development Goals.
However, an audience member raised the important point of balancing regional perspectives with global protocols necessary for an interconnected Internet. This highlighted the ongoing tension between the need for global technical standards and the benefits of regional diversity in addressing policy challenges. Roman Danyliw from the IETF provided additional insights on the technical perspective of regionalism in internet governance.
Evolution of Regionalism in Internet Governance
The panel noted significant developments in the evolution of regionalism within Internet governance. Chris Buckridge pointed out that national and regional Internet governance initiatives (NRIs) are a significant outcome of the IGF process, demonstrating the growing importance of regional approaches.
Jenna Manhau Fung discussed how the regional approach is evolving to address new issues like AI governance, indicating that regionalism remains relevant in tackling emerging technological challenges. Speakers mentioned specific examples of regional AI governance initiatives, highlighting the diverse approaches taken in different parts of the world.
An interesting perspective was introduced by Jamal Shahin, who suggested the need to consider non-geographically contiguous actors and coalitions. Shahin also briefly mentioned a UNU research project on regionalism in internet governance. This idea was further explored through an audience question about the potential for “middle powers” like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to form their own “region” based on shared values rather than geography. This concept challenges traditional notions of regionalism and suggests a potential future where regions might be defined by shared economic frameworks or political policies rather than geographical proximity.
Youth Engagement in Regional Internet Governance
The discussion also touched upon the crucial topic of youth engagement in regional Internet governance processes. Nadia Tjahja, a co-organizer of the workshop, suggested specific ways for youth to get involved, including connecting with NRIs and regional representatives. She also mentioned regional events and summer schools as avenues for youth participation.
Unresolved Issues and Future Considerations
While the discussion highlighted many benefits of regional approaches to Internet governance, it also revealed several unresolved issues. These include:
1. How to effectively balance regional needs with global technical requirements of the Internet
2. The role of non-geographically contiguous actors and coalitions in regional approaches to Internet governance
3. Improving pathways from regional to global Internet governance processes
The panel suggested some potential compromises and action items to address these challenges. These included using regional forums to develop common positions that can then feed into global discussions, and adopting a multi-layered approach that includes regional, sub-regional, and like-minded country groupings in addition to traditional geographic regions.
In conclusion, the discussion underscored the continuing relevance and importance of regional approaches in Internet governance. While acknowledging the need for global coordination, particularly in technical areas, the panelists emphasized the value of regional diversity in addressing policy challenges and fostering multi-stakeholder engagement. As the Internet governance landscape continues to evolve, it is clear that regional approaches will play a crucial role in shaping policies, developing infrastructure, and ensuring that diverse voices are heard in global debates."