Session
Subtheme
Organizer 1: Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Organizer 2: Technical Community, African Group
Organizer 3: Civil Society, African Group
Organizer 2: Technical Community, African Group
Organizer 3: Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 1: Jenna Manhau Fung, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: Athanase Bahizire, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 3: Dr. Nazarius Kirama, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 4: Yawri Carr, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 5: Turra Daniele, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Athanase Bahizire, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 3: Dr. Nazarius Kirama, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 4: Yawri Carr, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 5: Turra Daniele, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Format
Roundtable
Duration (minutes): 60
Format description: The round table format is ideal for this session because it fosters a more intimate, inclusive, and participatory discussion. By placing panelists and attendees on equal footing,it encourages open dialogue and active engagement, which aligns with the session’s goal of critically reflecting on the IGF’s legacy and future. The format also allows for seamless interaction between onsite and online participants, creating a collaborative atmosphere where everyone’s voice can be heard.
Duration (minutes): 60
Format description: The round table format is ideal for this session because it fosters a more intimate, inclusive, and participatory discussion. By placing panelists and attendees on equal footing,it encourages open dialogue and active engagement, which aligns with the session’s goal of critically reflecting on the IGF’s legacy and future. The format also allows for seamless interaction between onsite and online participants, creating a collaborative atmosphere where everyone’s voice can be heard.
Policy Question(s)
1. What has the IGF achieved in 20 years, and where has it fallen short?
2. Can the multistakeholder model of Internet governance survive without a platform like the IGF?
3. What reforms or alternatives are needed to ensure effective and inclusive digital cooperation in the future?
What will participants gain from attending this session? Participants will gain a critical understanding of the IGF’s legacy, including its successes, failures, and areas for improvement. They will explore diverse perspectives on the future of multistakeholder internet governance and engage in thought-provoking discussions about potential reforms or alternatives to the IGF. Attendees will leave with actionable insights and recommendations to shape the future of digital cooperation, ensuring it remains inclusive, effective, and relevant.
Description:
As the IGF marks its 20th anniversary, this session will critically examine its legacy, impact, and future. Framed as a “mock funeral,” the session will invite participants to investigate whether the IGF has been a success, a failure, or an unfinished experiment in multistakeholder internet governance. Key questions include: What has the IGF truly accomplished? Did it ever have real influence, or was it just a high-level talk shop? If we “bury” the IGF, what should replace it? Through a mix of debate, testimonials, and audience interaction, this session will challenge participants to decide the IGF’s fate: Should it be laid to rest, revived, or reborn into something better?
As the IGF marks its 20th anniversary, this session will critically examine its legacy, impact, and future. Framed as a “mock funeral,” the session will invite participants to investigate whether the IGF has been a success, a failure, or an unfinished experiment in multistakeholder internet governance. Key questions include: What has the IGF truly accomplished? Did it ever have real influence, or was it just a high-level talk shop? If we “bury” the IGF, what should replace it? Through a mix of debate, testimonials, and audience interaction, this session will challenge participants to decide the IGF’s fate: Should it be laid to rest, revived, or reborn into something better?
Expected Outcomes
1. A critical assessment of the IGF’s legacy, including its successes, failures, and unfinished business.
2. Concrete recommendations for improving or reimagining the IGF (or its successor) to better address the challenges of internet governance.
3. A renewed sense of purpose and direction for the multistakeholder model, ensuring it remains relevant and effective in the years to come.
Hybrid Format: To ensure an engaging and inclusive hybrid experience, the session will be facilitated by two moderators one onsite and one online who will work together to actively involve both in-person and virtual participants. The online moderator will curate questions and comments from remote attendees using tools like Mentimeter, while the onsite moderator will integrate these inputs into the discussion. Dedicated time will be allocated for online participation, ensuring a balanced dialogue.