Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Hello everyone. Apologies for sending to everyone but please I need the subscription link for this mailing list to share with other colleagues. Thank you On Saturday, November 1, 2025, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration. desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Go to https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network and choose option “How to Engage” – it points to the mailing list instructions. Best, v/ From: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> Reply-To: Amina Ramallan <aminaramallan@gmail.com> Date: Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 08:50 To: Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Hello everyone. Apologies for sending to everyone but please I need the subscription link for this mailing list to share with other colleagues. Thank you On Saturday, November 1, 2025, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dear Alejandro and Olivier, Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items. In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (here<https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20. In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodie...>) useful. My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to. Best Regards, Angela Wibawa Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +65 9661 6009 From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Reply to: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Cc: "wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUP...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Good morning all, This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items. As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas: * How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes. One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster. Best, Nick -- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) +<tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com<mailto:nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com> From: Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Alejandro and Olivier, Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items. In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (here<https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20. In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodie...>) useful. My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to. Best Regards, Angela Wibawa Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +65 9661 6009 From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Reply to: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Cc: "wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUP...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ DATA HANDLING For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy<https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com<https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries. CONFIDENTIALITY This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
Hi all, To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/ I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex. Best, Isra Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society From: Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM To: Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Good morning all, This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items. As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas: * How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes. One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster. Best, Nick -- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) +<tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com<mailto:nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com> From: Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Alejandro and Olivier, Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items. In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (here<https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20. In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodie...>) useful. My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to. Best Regards, Angela Wibawa Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +65 9661 6009 From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Reply to: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Cc: "wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUP...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ DATA HANDLING For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy<https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com<https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries. CONFIDENTIALITY This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
Dear Isra, Nick and all Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document. Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration. I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force. How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate. On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are. APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold): We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment. *We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.* We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously. Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council) Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>. But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously. Anriette Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971 55 9548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Anriette et al, There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going. I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable. The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly: /38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information / /Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. / /39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically / /neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for / /building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to / /correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the / /development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, / /and to serve national priorities./ I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies? A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary. The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions. Thanks. Jimson /Dr Jimson Olufuye,(fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council,AfICTA, www.aficta.africa/ On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971 55 9548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Jimson Thanks for responding :) An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe. In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change. One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important. But the importance of an _enabling environment_ does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group. By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025). Best Anriette Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
/38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information / /Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. / /39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically / /neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for / /building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to / /correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the / /development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, / /and to serve national priorities./
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
/Dr Jimson Olufuye,(fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council,AfICTA, www.aficta.africa/
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971 55 9548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson] Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions. Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Sivasubramanian, Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding? In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango. Cheers, Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an _enabling environment_ does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org>
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
/38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information / /Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. / /39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically / /neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for / /building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to / /correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the / /development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, / /and to serve national priorities./
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
/Dr Jimson Olufuye,(fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council,AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>/
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org> On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <mailto:angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear colleagues, Thank you to Olivier, Alejandro, Anriette, Nick, and others for these valuable reflections. The discussion captures both the urgency and complexity of this stage in the WSIS+20 process. In my input to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs last month, I emphasized that the Zero Draft provides a strong foundation but must go further in addressing the geopolitical forces shaping digital fragmentation — and in ensuring that inclusion translates into genuine agency for diverse stakeholders. (the text is pasted below) The exchanges here reaffirm that sustaining the WSIS vision requires integrating governance and development in a way that strengthens openness, accountability, and trust. A well-governed digital ecosystem is one that attracts responsible investment, fosters innovation, and remains resilient amid geopolitical stress. *Perhaps our collective message to national delegations should highlight how multistakeholder collaboration can tangibly deliver equitable development outcomes while safeguarding the core values that underpin the Internet.* Cheers, Pari *Reflections on the WSIS+20 Zero Draft By Dr. Pari Esfandiari *– October 2025 The Zero Draft of the WSIS+20 Review provides a thoughtful and constructive foundation. It reaffirms the people-centered vision of the Information Society and the enduring commitment to connectivity and multistakeholder cooperation—reaffirmations that are not only welcome but essential to the WSIS legacy. Yet while the Draft recognizes the dangers of digital fragmentation, it does not fully confront the geopolitical forces driving it: competing assertions of digital sovereignty, divergent regulatory philosophies, and the growing concentration of technological power that are reshaping governance itself. The United Nations’ commitment to political neutrality remains central to its legitimacy as a convener of global dialogue. However, neutrality must not become silence in the face of asymmetry. True neutrality is active, not passive—it is the stewardship of shared values, defending the openness of the Internet and ensuring that no single political or ideological model dominates the global digital space. The Draft’s emphasis on inclusion is also commendable, yet inclusion must move beyond representation to real agency. Access and attendance are insufficient if many stakeholders remain distant from the processes that shape digital norms. The legitimacy of governance depends on how meaningfully diverse voices can influence outcomes. In the aftermath of the Pact for the Future and the Global Digital Compact, the WSIS+20 Review has a vital responsibility: *to safeguard the Internet’s core values*—openness, universality, interoperability, and neutrality—and to embed them within governance systems resilient to geopolitical stress. The Zero Draft is an important step forward. Its next iteration should go further in balancing power, accountability, and legitimacy in digital governance while ensuring that transparency and participation are not used to justify control or restrict openness. If WSIS+20 reaffirms not only principles but also the means to protect them, it can help preserve the Internet as a space of shared trust rather than strategic rivalry. On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 12:52 PM Jimson Olufuye via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Pari Esfandiari President *Global TechnoPolitics Forum <http://www.technopolitics.org> * *Pario <http://www.parioconsultants.com>- Architects of Ideas* info@TechnoPolitics.org <info@technopolitics.org> *Linkedin Profile <https://www.linkedin.com/in/pariesfandiari/>* Tel: +1-202*-735-1415* (Office) : +1-310-435-0888 (Cell) : +44-731-210-4049 (Cell)
Dear Jimson, My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding. On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye <jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
Hi S., It'd be interesting to see how the non-passive funding would work seeing that there is no successful case in history for any reference. Cheers, JO On 08/11/2025 8:50 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
Dear Jimson,
My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye <jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson
On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an _enabling environment_ does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org>
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
/38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information / /Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. / /39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically / /neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for / /building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to / /correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the / /development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, / /and to serve national priorities./
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
/Dr Jimson Olufuye,(fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council,AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>/
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org> On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <mailto:angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
Dear all, A few comments on the comments that have already been made by esteemed colleagues and my own views on relevant considerations for the stage we are in: 1. Paying attention to stakeholder interests. I take note of words like (MUST) in Dr. Paris intervention. Listening to His Excellency Ekitela Lokaale at various sessions organized by the ccNSO Internet Governance Liaison Committee and a few Tete a Tetes in the corridors or is it elevators. There are varying interests across stakeholder groupings and it is time for clarity and making our case to win over those who might have differing opinions on the fundamental issues we should focus on. In summary he urged compromise. The question is what are we willing to compromise and to what extent. 2. I also listened to Comments by Markus Kummer who played pivotal roles in both the WGIG and WSIS processes including managing some of the outcomes that resulted in the IGF in which he alluded to the clarity with which the 2005 WSIS process had on what the IGF process is , what it should achieve and how stakeholders would go about the process. 3. I would also like to invite us to listen to the ccNSO session and in particular Dr. Olga Cavallis presentation through which she made distinctions between Internet Governance and Digital Governance, terms that are being used interchangeably yet they are weighty and have implications when it comes to negotiation. 4. My concluding thoughts are the need for clarity of purpose on key issues as pertains to Internet Governance, clarity of what we are willing to compromise on and clarity on what each stakeholder will contribute. This was well captured by Byron Holland in his TCCM presentation. My humble opinion On Sun, Nov 9, 2025 at 1:31 AM Jimson Olufuye via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi S.,
It'd be interesting to see how the non-passive funding would work seeing that there is no successful case in history for any reference.
Cheers,
JO On 08/11/2025 8:50 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
Dear Jimson,
My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye < jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
I just managed to get the session recording <https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/HHVXQbOWN7IrTt2TZ7-K9N4vQDQ1NdUk35q8FrRXi2Ab0...> On Sun, Nov 9, 2025 at 7:33 AM Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
A few comments on the comments that have already been made by esteemed colleagues and my own views on relevant considerations for the stage we are in:
1. Paying attention to stakeholder interests. I take note of words like (MUST) in Dr. Paris intervention. Listening to His Excellency Ekitela Lokaale at various sessions organized by the ccNSO Internet Governance Liaison Committee and a few Tete a Tetes in the corridors or is it elevators. There are varying interests across stakeholder groupings and it is time for clarity and making our case to win over those who might have differing opinions on the fundamental issues we should focus on. In summary he urged compromise. The question is what are we willing to compromise and to what extent. 2. I also listened to Comments by Markus Kummer who played pivotal roles in both the WGIG and WSIS processes including managing some of the outcomes that resulted in the IGF in which he alluded to the clarity with which the 2005 WSIS process had on what the IGF process is , what it should achieve and how stakeholders would go about the process. 3. I would also like to invite us to listen to the ccNSO session and in particular Dr. Olga Cavallis presentation through which she made distinctions between Internet Governance and Digital Governance, terms that are being used interchangeably yet they are weighty and have implications when it comes to negotiation. 4. My concluding thoughts are the need for clarity of purpose on key issues as pertains to Internet Governance, clarity of what we are willing to compromise on and clarity on what each stakeholder will contribute. This was well captured by Byron Holland in his TCCM presentation.
My humble opinion
On Sun, Nov 9, 2025 at 1:31 AM Jimson Olufuye via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi S.,
It'd be interesting to see how the non-passive funding would work seeing that there is no successful case in history for any reference.
Cheers,
JO On 08/11/2025 8:50 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
Dear Jimson,
My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye < jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
+1 Siva Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/08 21:50, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
Dear Jimson,
My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye <jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson
On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an _enabling environment_ does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org>
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
/38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information / /Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. / /39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically / /neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for / /building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to / /correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the / /development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, / /and to serve national priorities./
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
/Dr Jimson Olufuye,(fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council,AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>/
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org <http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org> On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <mailto:angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <mailto:ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <mailto:wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
Thank you Anriette. Sivasubramanian M On Tue, 11 Nov, 2025, 16:00 Anriette Esterhuysen, <anriette@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 Siva
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/08 21:50, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
Dear Jimson,
My point was just that. When a country has a poor local economic environment, worsened by persistent causative factors and often combined with inefficient, corrupt, or malignant governance, it provides a compelling reason for global processes to channel funding. What you probably missed is that I did not imply passive, hands-off funding.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 4:21 PM Jimson Olufuye < jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng> wrote:
Hi Sivasubramanian,
Can you name a country in history whose local economic environment is bad for investment, and has benefited considerably from forced injection of funding?
In my opinion, any funding mobilised into areas where it is not desired will be wasted. As it is said, it takes two to tango.
Cheers,
Jimson On 05/11/2025 3:53 pm, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
"funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law." [Jimson]
Those countries (non-specific) that don't have such environment happen to be the ones that may be in greater need of help. (In general) if a country is badly organized to handle an inflow of substantial help, or otherwise under some form of partial or self-serving dictatorial rule, funding can and must still be earmarked perhaps with a process to route it, administer it through two or three competent nations who will together designate a suitable, empowered task force to ensure that the funds are carefully and optimally deployed, despite local conditions.
Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
On Wed, 5 Nov, 2025, 18:11 Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20, < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Jimson
Thanks for responding :)
An enabling environment is absolutely fundamental. But the evidence shows that even when there the environment is relatively "enabling", investment flows towards areas/regions/activities that are likely to generate a decent ROI, in not too long a timeframe.
In contexts where there is very uneven existing infrastructure, human capacity and business activity this does mean that some people and places remain 'left behind'. In countries dealing with massive debt burdens it becomes even harder to effect positive change.
One of the activities we suggest for a working group is precisely to look at what approaches to financing WSIS implementation have worked well, and what have not . We also know that all over the world even where there is healthy private sector investment, the need for public investment does not go away. Also, we need an open and competitive enabling environment that creates opportunity for a variety of different initiatives - small, medium, large, national, local and international. We don't have nearly enough of that - particularly not in telecoms and internet access markets. And I am not even talking about demand-side investment which is an even grater challenge. That is why Action Line C6 is so important.
But the importance of an *enabling environment* does not detract from the fact that financing has to be taken seriously -- by all stakeholder groups, but particularly by governments. Please note also that our proposal is not simply for 'rich' countries to give more money to so-called "poor" countries. We are simply saying that there is a need for a systematic look at financing WSIS implementation and doing this in the outcome document itself is just not realistic. That is why we suggest a working group.
By the way, I found this article a very good and easy read. It is an empirical look at "blended finance" defined as the use of concessional public resources to mobilise private capital for development and shows that it just does not work all that well, even when the environment is kind of "enabling". Mind the Mission, Not the Gap: Rethinking finance for public purpose <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10211056/1/Mazzucato_Working_Paper_Ble...> by Mariana Mazzucato and Rogério Vieira de Sá, University College London Institute for Public Purpose (2025).
Best
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/05 11:42, Jimson Olufuye wrote:
Hi Anriette et al,
There is a saying that "where your treasure is, is where your heart will be". From business perspective, those with the funds need to see the value in where their investment is going.
I do not object to the call for a Working Group on Financing, but the reason the earlier call failed has not been addressed, and that is the need for necessary enabling environment at the national/subregional/regional levels that ensures the funding when deployed, delivers benefits, ROI, and is sustainable.
The WSIS Action Line C6, Enabling Environment, states clearly:
*38. An enabling environment at national and international levels is essential for the Information * *Society. ICTs should be used as an important tool for good governance. * *39. The rule of law, accompanied by a supportive, transparent, pro-competitive, technologically * *neutral and predictable policy and regulatory framework reflecting national realities, is essential for * *building a people-centred Information Society. Governments should intervene, as appropriate, to * *correct market failures, to maintain fair competition, to attract investment, to enhance the * *development of the ICT infrastructure and applications, to maximize economic and social benefits, * *and to serve national priorities.*
I can tell you that funding naturally goes to countries with a friendly, balanced investment environment that upholds the rule of law. If the Working Group would further stretch this, that would be great. But would the Working Group compel countries to implement sustainable investment policies?
A tweak recognising the above in your draft language may be necessary.
The summary from my business perspective is that, much of what would drive investment lies with the investment policies of countries within their borders and in cooperation with others across their economic subregions/regions.
Thanks.
Jimson
*Dr Jimson Olufuye, (fncs, ficma, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PRINCE2, PhD) Principal Consultant, Kontemporary Konsulting Ltd, www.kontemporary.net.ng <http://www.kontemporary.net.ng/> Founder, fmr Chair, & Chair of Advisory Council, AfICTA, www.aficta.africa <http://www.aficta.africa>*
On 05/11/2025 8:17 am, Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 wrote:
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...> .
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communicationswww.apc.org//afrisig.org
On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society *From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org> <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Av.+Universidad+3000,+04510+Mexico+DF+Mex...> +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in
Dear Anriette and colleagues, Firstly my apologies for being slow to reply, there’s a lot of Internet-related things happening in NY right now. Firstly there’s a version of your proposal that made it into v1, congratulations. What is currently included however is, to my mind, far too vague, I think it will have to have some more specific scope in order to get through the sausage grinder here. I also think we can’t just look at financing, we also have to look at enabling policies. For example on the digital divide, we know the regulatory best practices which produce affordability and we also know that there’s a correlation between countries that don’t implement them and high costs. This is also true of high tariffs on ICT goods, which are very high in developing countries in particular (as repeatedly documented by the WTO statistics division). And so on. If there’s going to be a working group on this, I submit that it should identify potential funding options and also what regulatory/policy frameworks produce positive impacts either to attract funding in key areas or which create market incentives that help solve a problem. There has been a lot of good work on all these issues in many places, one of the biggest problems is it gets buried and not read. I look forward to your thoughts! Best, Nick -- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) +<tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com<mailto:nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com> From: Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at 3:20 AM To: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>, valeriab@apc.org <valeriab@apc.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Isra, Nick and all Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document. Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration. I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force. How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate. On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are. APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold): We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment. We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches. We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously. Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing<https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council) Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action<https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation<https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative<https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>. But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously. Anriette Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com<mailto:anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com> Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org<http://www.apc.org//afrisig.org> On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote: Hi all, To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/ I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex. Best, Isra Isra Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society From: Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Date: Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM To: Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org><mailto:angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com><mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com><mailto:ocl@gih.com> Cc: wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Good morning all, This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items. As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas: * How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes. One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster. Best, Nick -- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) +<tel:+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com<mailto:nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com> From: Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Date: Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com><mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com><mailto:ocl@gih.com> Cc: wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Alejandro and Olivier, Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items. In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (here<https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20. In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (here<https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodie...>) useful. My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to. Best Regards, Angela Wibawa Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +65 9661 6009 From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Reply to: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com><mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com><mailto:ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com><mailto:apisanty@gmail.com> Cc: "wsis20@icann.org"<mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUP...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ DATA HANDLING For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy<https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com<https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries. CONFIDENTIALITY This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Nick Thanks for the response. T On 2025/11/11 00:30, Ashton-Hart, Nick wrote:
Dear Anriette and colleagues,
Firstly my apologies for being slow to reply, there’s a lot of Internet-related things happening in NY right now. There is indeed a lot happening.
Firstly there’s a version of your proposal that made it into v1, congratulations. What is currently included however is, to my mind, far too vague, I think it will have to have some more specific scope in order to get through the sausage grinder here. Thanks. But I think too much detail might also be problematic. What is important is recognition that financing needs attention.
I also think we can’t just look at financing, we also have to look at enabling policies. For example on the digital divide, we know the regulatory best practices which produce affordability and we also know that there’s a correlation between countries that don’t implement them and high costs. This is also true of high tariffs on ICT goods, which are very high in developing countries in particular (as repeatedly documented by the WTO statistics division). And so on.
I agree. But I think this points to a characteristic of the draft outcome document that we have must remember. * It does not include any detail on the action lines, but, *THE ACTION LINES REMAIN AT THE CORE OF THE WSIS IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK *and the WSIS+20 outcome document should be read as one that frames the action lines - not a substitute. There is an action line on enabling environment and its implementation does relate to financing as well as to digital inclusion. However, it is worth remembering that an enabling policy and regulatory environment for ICT for development does not eliminate the underlying structural causes of digital inequality: poverty, unemployment, debt, gender inequality, insufficient access to education, healthcare etc. to mention a view. Even countries with relatively enabling policy and regulation by extreme digital inequality - Rwanda, often applauded for its progressive policies has an internet penetration rate of around 38%, but social media use and general internet use in Rwanda is among the lowest in Africa. Kenya - a country that has been a leader in open internet regulation - had, according to the ITU, 35% internet penetration in 2024. Usage among those who do have internet is much higher on the other hand. Enabling policy and regulation on its own is not enough but it is also worth looking at what sector of the market is being enabled (or not). Currently what has been viewed as enabling regulation for internet infrastructure has prioritised the interests of large telcos rather than of local and national ISPs, not to mention smaller players who provide services in markets that are not profitable for the big players. Diversifying internet infrastructure and service markets needs enabling policy, but also new approaches to financing and investment - from the public and private sectors.
If there’s going to be a working group on this, I submit that it should identify potential funding options and also what regulatory/policy frameworks produce positive impacts either to attract funding in key areas or which create market incentives that help solve a problem. There has been a lot of good work on all these issues in many places, one of the biggest problems is it gets buried and not read.
Agree :) Anriette
I look forward to your thoughts!
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971 55 9548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Anriette Esterhuysen via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at 3:20 AM *To: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>, valeriab@apc.org <valeriab@apc.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Isra, Nick and all
Financing is indeed a priority and APC.org has propose a simple way forward by proposing that a working group or task force to work on financing for fixed period of time post WSIS+20 be mandated in the outcome document.
Nick you might remember that both the ideas you share here were in the original report of the WSIS Task Force on Financing Mechanisms convened in Geneva in 2003 and presented in Tunis. Unfortunately these proposals were not accepted and member states did not give financing the attention it deserved. The rest is history -- and is reflected in Africa, 20 years later, having only 38 to 38% internet penetration.
I like Nick's ideas but I think they will only produce benefit alongside a mandated working group or task force.
How will these 'good ideas' be implemented and monitored? Who will be accountable for following up on these good ideas. How can there be certainty that these good ideas meet specific needs of specific regions or communities? And are they really that different from what is underway already? For example the ITU is already working towards the necessary reform in now Universal Service Funds operate.
On their own these good ideas will not have the impact that is needed to deal with a resource gap that is massive -- as huge as the digital inequality gap which is simply not shrinking for many people and parts of the world. In fact, as we move to faster and greater digitalisation those who do not have the basic connectivity, skills or devices become even more marginalised than they already are.
APC’s suggestion is to amend paragraph 72 of the outcome document to read as follows (new text in bold):
We recognise that harnessing ICTs for development and bridging digital divides will require further sustained investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, with public as well as private investment.
*We call for the establishment of a dedicated working group or task force to explore and propose financing mechanisms to support implementation of the WSIS vision and goals, building on the outcome of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and giving consideration to public finance, revision of the design and deployment of universal service funds, development bonds, tax revenue, and other forms of private investment and innovative and collaborative approaches.*
We remain flexible on the exact wording of this proposal. What we feel is vital is clear and action-oriented recognition that a process is needed for taking financing WSIS implementation seriously.
Read more about this proposal in two recent blogs: The WSIS+20 review: Additional ideas to build on APC’s proposal for a dedicated focus on financing <https://www.apc.org/en/news/wsis20-review-additional-ideas-build-apcs-propos...> By Anriette Esterhuysen, Valeria Betancourt and Carlos Rey Moreno (APC) with input from Konstantinos Komaitis (resident senior fellow, Democracy and Tech Initiative, Atlantic Council)
Financing digital equity at WSIS+20: A task force to turn commitments into action <https://www.apc.org/en/news/financing-digital-equity-wsis20-task-force-turn-...> By Konstantinos Komaitis, Valeria Betancourt and Anriette Esterhuysen
Also read about an October event organised by APC with the UK government's FCDO and UNESCO and the T20 Task Force on Digital Transformation <https://www.apc.org/en/news/call-action-unlocking-investment-community-conne...> on financing locally driven and community-centred connectivity initiatives. We hope to launch an actual concrete initiative within the next two years which will complement ISOC's fantastic Co-funding Initiative <https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/access/connectivity-co-funding-initia...>.
But remember too, and this is really important, that the financing needs of WSIS implementation is about much more than funding the IGF, or even bridging the connectivity gap --- it is about open and effective e-government and digital public services, using tech to improve people's access to education, to health services, a free and independent media, human capacity to use and create digital tools and economies, and so much more. That is why we feel so strongly that it would be a failure if WSIS+20 repeated the oversights of 2003, 2005 and 2010 by not taking financing seriously.
Anriette
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette@apc.org//anriette@gmail.com Senior advisor global and regional internet governance Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org//afrisig.org On 2025/11/03 16:16, Israel Rosas via wsis20 wrote:
Hi all,
To Alex’s points, our remarks and written contributions are located on a dedicated page on our website: https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-governance/wsis/
I also concur with Nick’s points on the need for suggesting concrete solutions. As far as we understand, delegates need suggested language that can help bridge the different perspectives. However, focusing on principles may be good to brief government officials new to these topics. It’s up to local community members to identify the right approach and the right people to target, as expressed by Alex.
Best, Isra
Isra Rosas,Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society
*From: *Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, November 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM *To: *Angela Wibawa <angela.wibawa@icann.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
* _How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly_. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. * _Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives_, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO* *(m) + <tel:+971 55 9548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (_here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>_) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>_) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (_here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>_) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <_wsis20@icann.org_> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>_ and _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>_
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: _https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>_
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: _https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>_
Read the public archives for this mailing list: _https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/_
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy_) and the website Terms of Service (_https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos_). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: _http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>_ LinkedIn: _http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>_ Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, _http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>_ Twitter: _http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>_ ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, _http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Nick, thanks! This is reminiscent of WSIS of 2003-2005 (and previous processes) in which development and governance are somehow pitted against each other. Additional to what you are proposing (which I find very sensible) those participating in these debates need to try to deliver the point that the best for development is an open, competently connected Internet with no mandated blackouts. Hard to do when some governments use the first to obstruct the second, which they don't really want. (Which is also reminiscent of 2003-2005 and earlier.) Alejandro Pisanty On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:49 AM Ashton-Hart, Nick < nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com> wrote:
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty < apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hey folks Could someone help me understand the relationship or not with UNESCO's work? https://www.unesco.org/en/tags/internet https://www.unesco.org/en/internet-universality-indicators I realise the latter is likely considered expensive to implement, but that doesn't stop collaborations across regions/stakeholders from using the ROAM-X framework for benchmarking as long as it's community driven. Also recognise that criteria/metrics would likely need to be developed locally for more detailed place-based type reports/planning. Thanks everyone. Hope you and yours are well. Kiki On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 1:50 AM Ashton-Hart, Nick via wsis20 < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Good morning all,
This is a good thread and an excellent set of action items.
As someone based in New York who is talking to delegates daily about the review, I can tell you that there is a particular need for two kinds of good ideas:
- *How more financing can be attracted to delivering the action lines more quickly*. It is widely understood that calling new funds to be started is basically not going to work but that doesn’t mean existing resources can’t be made more easily accessible to developing countries. We’ve suggested a portal connected to the action lines which provides connections to relevant programs from international financial institutions, regional development banks, and private foundations in particular. Some language on prioritizing the use of USFs to bridge divides leveraging best practices could be another addition. - *Ideas for how existing institutions can work more effectively together without changing their mandates or objectives*, particularly UNGIS, CSTD, IGF, and the WSIS Forum. The idea here would be to connect common threads across the four more effectively so that what happens at one has more value throughout the different processes.
One thing in particular I would strongly advise: we need to move beyond talking about multistakeholderism and why it is the right approach generally to proposing more specific examples of how it can be used to deliver development outcomes faster.
Best, Nick
-- Nick Ashton-Hart APCO (m) + <+971%2055%209548671>1 202 779 1072 nashtonhart@apcoworldwide.com
*From: *Angela Wibawa via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, November 2, 2025 at 8:45 PM *To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Alejandro and Olivier,
Thank you for summarising the discussions that took place at ICANN84 and for proposing the action items.
In terms of the list/ schedule of events, the UN DESA roadmap webpage (*here <https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/PreparatoryProcessRoadmap/>*) provides a useful insight on some of the key activities for WSIS+20.
In terms of written materials, there are several useful information on the WSIS+20 Outreach Network webpage (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/wsis20-outreach-network>*) – specifically under the “Resources” and “Knowledge Hub” tabs at the lower part of the webpage. You might also find information on our past contributions to the WSIS+20 related processes (*here <https://www.icann.org/en/government-engagement/submissions-to-external-bodies>*) useful.
My colleagues might add further insights once they get a chance to.
Best Regards,
Angela Wibawa
Director APAC, Government and IGO Engagement
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Mobile: +65 9661 6009
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply to: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Sunday, 2 November 2025 at 11:40 *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty < apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *"wsis20@icann.org" <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <*wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>*> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXYAlFdvY$>* and *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXTc8jd9I$>*
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: *https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA*20High-Level-Meeting__;JQ!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXWshv2h-$>*
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: *https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXY9Cmb0t$>*
Read the public archives for this mailing list: *https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/>*
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>*) and the website Terms of Service (*https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>*). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: *http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXdmArTdd$>* LinkedIn: *http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXRiCDtHG$>* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, *http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVFM3b0n$>* Twitter: *http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXfIFw9JL$>* ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, *http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!-H0e4bEr6tgetTMUPVC2qmQfTmPsSK6vfrjuiN7Mdhb4nY_MbscJpn9y3LcqKCtOM9TFKrW18ngGHpkGXVgMagVR$>* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
------------------------------
DATA HANDLING
For data handling questions, please view our Privacy Policy <https://apcoworldwide.com/privacy-policy/> or contact us at privacy@apcoworldwide.com <https://%20privacy@apcoworldwide.com/> with any inquiries.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Тhanks, Alejandro and Olivier. Further to what Angela has already shared already, I think that Alejandro’s idea to use the national and regional IGFs is a great one. See some comments below. From: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> Reply-To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Date: Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 23:40 To: Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> Cc: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, There’s the ITU WTDC this month in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many member states will be there, together with ITU-D sector members. Perhaps worth the effort for members of this list to reach out to their Telecom Administration, who will have representatives there. But one must keep in mind that participation at the WTDC is usually not from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who are the ones negotiating at the WSIS+20. some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; I don’t know who could write a paper in such a short time, but there have been several documents, more or less explaining the rationale behind the positions that ICANN and other technical organizations have taken vis-à-vis WSIS+20. Hope the links Angela shared are helpful, and one could search ISOC, RIPE NCC, TCCM, and others, to find out their positions. Best, v/ P.S. Olivier, if the experience from WSIS+10 is worth something, then I can share that the final document was agreed about 48 hours before the high-level meeting started. Let’s see what happens this year. 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5c...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uPOSo3Q00B...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Veni, thanks! Those closer to the NRIs should act ASAP. Re WTDC, as you say, it's not as effective but worth a try for those with access to their representatives. Also it is a tough forum for the Internet and multistakeholderism, historically, so good if people can approach the ISOC team there (I assume there is one, and remember they are given the worst seats i the room whil all the wheeling and dealing takes place elsewhere), and also ICANN if you have someone - do you? Alejandro Pisanty On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 1:22 PM Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> wrote:
Тhanks, Alejandro and Olivier.
Further to what Angela has already shared already, I think that Alejandro’s idea to use the national and regional IGFs is a great one. See some comments below.
*From: *WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply-To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 23:40 *To: *Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty < apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming,
There’s the ITU WTDC this month in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many member states will be there, together with ITU-D sector members. Perhaps worth the effort for members of this list to reach out to their Telecom Administration, who will have representatives there. But one must keep in mind that participation at the WTDC is usually not from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who are the ones negotiating at the WSIS+20.
some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
I don’t know who could write a paper in such a short time, but there have been several documents, more or less explaining the rationale behind the positions that ICANN and other technical organizations have taken vis-à-vis WSIS+20. Hope the links Angela shared are helpful, and one could search ISOC, RIPE NCC, TCCM, and others, to find out their positions.
Best,
v/
P.S. Olivier, if the experience from WSIS+10 is worth something, then I can share that the final document was agreed about 48 hours before the high-level meeting started. Let’s see what happens this year.
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...>
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...>
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...>
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5c...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uPOSo3Q00B...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hi, Alx, all Just to confirm that ISOC will be attending WTDC with a delegation. Juan Peirano (lead), Tanya Tropina, Adrian Wang, and I will be in our regular seats (they have improved in previous meetings, though!) for the full two weeks of the Conference. Best Sebastián Bellagamba, VP, External and Community Engagement bellagamba@isoc.org | Mobile: +598 91 383959 [A close up of a sign Description automatically generated] internetsociety.org<http://www.internetsociety.org> | @internetsociety From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Monday, 3 November 2025 at 16:38 To: Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Veni, thanks! Those closer to the NRIs should act ASAP. Re WTDC, as you say, it's not as effective but worth a try for those with access to their representatives. Also it is a tough forum for the Internet and multistakeholderism, historically, so good if people can approach the ISOC team there (I assume there is one, and remember they are given the worst seats i the room whil all the wheeling and dealing takes place elsewhere), and also ICANN if you have someone - do you? Alejandro Pisanty On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 1:22 PM Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org<mailto:veni.markovski@icann.org>> wrote: Тhanks, Alejandro and Olivier. Further to what Angela has already shared already, I think that Alejandro’s idea to use the national and regional IGFs is a great one. See some comments below. From: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Reply-To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com<mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>> Date: Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 23:40 To: Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com<mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>> Cc: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, There’s the ITU WTDC this month in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many member states will be there, together with ITU-D sector members. Perhaps worth the effort for members of this list to reach out to their Telecom Administration, who will have representatives there. But one must keep in mind that participation at the WTDC is usually not from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who are the ones negotiating at the WSIS+20. some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; I don’t know who could write a paper in such a short time, but there have been several documents, more or less explaining the rationale behind the positions that ICANN and other technical organizations have taken vis-à-vis WSIS+20. Hope the links Angela shared are helpful, and one could search ISOC, RIPE NCC, TCCM, and others, to find out their positions. Best, v/ P.S. Olivier, if the experience from WSIS+10 is worth something, then I can share that the final document was agreed about 48 hours before the high-level meeting started. Let’s see what happens this year. 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5c...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uPOSo3Q00B...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dear Sebastian, that's good to know. In the UK there is some element of commonality between the people following the WTDC and other UN-related processes, but it is not necessarily the case for all countries. In the UK we have had, for a long time, a number of multistakeholder groups (initially called the MAGIG - Multistakeholder Advisory Group on Internet Governance, now called the MIGG - Multistakeholder Internet Governance Group, convened by the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology, incorporating non government stakeholders in the discussion group and, where possible, as part of the UK Government delegation. You are likely to find such an "enhanced delegation" at WTDC. Back at WCIT in 2012, "enhanced delegations" from several countries were very helpful in reaching the results that were reached, if only to provide immediate feedback in relation to new issues coming up on the agenda at short notice. The UK Government had published the terms of reference and dynamics of how the UK MAGIG worked. If anyone thinks it would be helpful to share more information, I could ask the relevant people in DSIT to share an updated document, if/when available. These are good practice which might have been lost with changes in administration and/or personnel over the years. Kindest regards, Olivier On 04/11/2025 12:37, Sebastian Bellagamba via wsis20 wrote:
Hi, Alx, all
Just to confirm that ISOC will be attending WTDC with a delegation. Juan Peirano (lead), Tanya Tropina, Adrian Wang, and I will be in our regular seats (they have improved in previous meetings, though!) for the full two weeks of the Conference.
Best
* Sebastián Bellagamba*, VP, External and Community Engagement bellagamba@isoc.org | Mobile: +598 91 383959 A close up of a sign Description automatically generated _internetsociety.org <http://www.internetsociety.org>_ | @internetsociety
*From: *Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, 3 November 2025 at 16:38 *To: *Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> *Cc: *wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Veni,
thanks! Those closer to the NRIs should act ASAP.
Re WTDC, as you say, it's not as effective but worth a try for those with access to their representatives. Also it is a tough forum for the Internet and multistakeholderism, historically, so good if people can approach the ISOC team there (I assume there is one, and remember they are given the worst seats i the room whil all the wheeling and dealing takes place elsewhere), and also ICANN if you have someone - do you?
Alejandro Pisanty
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 1:22 PM Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> wrote:
Тhanks, Alejandro and Olivier.
Further to what Angela has already shared already, I think that Alejandro’s idea to use the national and regional IGFs is a great one. See some comments below.
*From: *WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> *Reply-To: *Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 23:40 *To: *Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> *Cc: *WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps
Dear Olivier,
thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast.
Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming,
There’s the ITU WTDC this month in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many member states will be there, together with ITU-D sector members. Perhaps worth the effort for members of this list to reach out to their Telecom Administration, who will have representatives there. But one must keep in mind that participation at the WTDC is usually not from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who are the ones negotiating at the WSIS+20.
some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items:
1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong;
I don’t know who could write a paper in such a short time, but there have been several documents, more or less explaining the rationale behind the positions that ICANN and other technical organizations have taken vis-à-vis WSIS+20. Hope the links Angela shared are helpful, and one could search ISOC, RIPE NCC, TCCM, and others, to find out their positions.
Best,
v/
P.S. Olivier, if the experience from WSIS+10 is worth something, then I can share that the final document was agreed about 48 hours before the high-level meeting started. Let’s see what happens this year.
2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's
a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions;
b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions.
I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding?
Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin.
I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States.
Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...>
But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...>
And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet.
This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...>
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5c...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uPOSo3Q00B...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Looking forward to seeing our UK colleagues. Thank you, Olivier! From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Date: Saturday, 8 November 2025 at 12:49 To: Sebastian Bellagamba <bellagamba@isoc.org>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com>, Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> Cc: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: Re: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Sebastian, that's good to know. In the UK there is some element of commonality between the people following the WTDC and other UN-related processes, but it is not necessarily the case for all countries. In the UK we have had, for a long time, a number of multistakeholder groups (initially called the MAGIG - Multistakeholder Advisory Group on Internet Governance, now called the MIGG - Multistakeholder Internet Governance Group, convened by the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology, incorporating non government stakeholders in the discussion group and, where possible, as part of the UK Government delegation. You are likely to find such an "enhanced delegation" at WTDC. Back at WCIT in 2012, "enhanced delegations" from several countries were very helpful in reaching the results that were reached, if only to provide immediate feedback in relation to new issues coming up on the agenda at short notice. The UK Government had published the terms of reference and dynamics of how the UK MAGIG worked. If anyone thinks it would be helpful to share more information, I could ask the relevant people in DSIT to share an updated document, if/when available. These are good practice which might have been lost with changes in administration and/or personnel over the years. Kindest regards, Olivier On 04/11/2025 12:37, Sebastian Bellagamba via wsis20 wrote: Hi, Alx, all Just to confirm that ISOC will be attending WTDC with a delegation. Juan Peirano (lead), Tanya Tropina, Adrian Wang, and I will be in our regular seats (they have improved in previous meetings, though!) for the full two weeks of the Conference. Best Sebastián Bellagamba, VP, External and Community Engagement bellagamba@isoc.org<mailto:bellagamba@isoc.org> | Mobile: +598 91 383959 [A close up of a sign Description automatically generated] internetsociety.org<http://www.internetsociety.org> | @internetsociety From: Alejandro Pisanty via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Date: Monday, 3 November 2025 at 16:38 To: Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org><mailto:veni.markovski@icann.org> Cc: wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org> <wsis20@icann.org><mailto:wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Veni, thanks! Those closer to the NRIs should act ASAP. Re WTDC, as you say, it's not as effective but worth a try for those with access to their representatives. Also it is a tough forum for the Internet and multistakeholderism, historically, so good if people can approach the ISOC team there (I assume there is one, and remember they are given the worst seats i the room whil all the wheeling and dealing takes place elsewhere), and also ICANN if you have someone - do you? Alejandro Pisanty On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 1:22 PM Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org<mailto:veni.markovski@icann.org>> wrote: Тhanks, Alejandro and Olivier. Further to what Angela has already shared already, I think that Alejandro’s idea to use the national and regional IGFs is a great one. See some comments below. From: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Reply-To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com<mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>> Date: Saturday, November 1, 2025 at 23:40 To: Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com<mailto:apisanty@gmail.com>> Cc: WSIS20 Outreach Network <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Subject: [wsis20] Re: Stakeholder consultations at ICANN84 and next steps Dear Olivier, thanks for the summary and especially thanks for the heads-up. There is little time left and we must work hard and at speed. "issue-trading" is too close to "horse-trading" and that usually happens way above our heads, and behind doors only government representatives can cross. Also, we do know that there are many governments, and many individual representatives, whose positions are already adverse and will harden for something like the UN GA. Some are lost cases and probably trying to communicate with them will only harden their positions even further and do more damage than good. Each one of us knows of a few so we can triage relatively fast. Let's use all possible fora left before the fateful dates. One forum for sure is LACIGF, coming this week November 5 and 6. It takes place in Cordoba, Argentina, and online. There may be other international meetings and some NRIs (National and Regional Internet Governance Forums) upcoming, There’s the ITU WTDC this month in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many member states will be there, together with ITU-D sector members. Perhaps worth the effort for members of this list to reach out to their Telecom Administration, who will have representatives there. But one must keep in mind that participation at the WTDC is usually not from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who are the ones negotiating at the WSIS+20. some ot them with a good chance of being powerful before their own governments and beyond borders. Let me propose the following action items: 1. Craft a briefing paper that highlights the important issues and the damage they can bring if done wrong; I don’t know who could write a paper in such a short time, but there have been several documents, more or less explaining the rationale behind the positions that ICANN and other technical organizations have taken vis-à-vis WSIS+20. Hope the links Angela shared are helpful, and one could search ISOC, RIPE NCC, TCCM, and others, to find out their positions. Best, v/ P.S. Olivier, if the experience from WSIS+10 is worth something, then I can share that the final document was agreed about 48 hours before the high-level meeting started. Let’s see what happens this year. 2. Caucus among the participants in LACIGF and other upcoming venues and plan a solid intervention. Since in LACIGF and likely any other meeting in the coming few weeks the programs are already solidified, let's a. talk to all scheduled participants and see that they convey the messages in their interventions and other discussions; b. take the microphone (and written participations as well) in all possible relevant panels and discussions. I* staff - can you come up with a list/schedule of events, from your own files and plans, and share it? can you share the briefing texts you have already written and maybe fine-tuned for the alarm Olivier is sounding? Let's meet in small groups and push this work forward. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 6:11 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Colleagues, those of you attending ICANN84 will have been aware of the stakeholder consultations that His Excellency Ambassador Ekitela Lokaale (Kenya) held throughout the week, both in open, large assemblies and in small groups. Ambassador Lokaale is one of the two Co-Facilitators of the WSIS+20 review process, the other being Her Excellency Suela Janina (Albania), who was not present in Dublin. I was very pleased with the extent to which Ambassador Lokaale was open to full dialogue and to listening to all parts of ICANN's community. It was also very interesting to obtain some feedback as to what topics to be included in the Paper will have a chance to remain there and what topics are already flagged as receiving significant opposition by some member States. Of course, the next big steps will be the virtual stakeholder consultations to be held on 14 November. Instructions on how to participate are given on: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20 [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20__...> and https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/rev1consultation [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/r...> But then, the final meeting in the process will be that of the UN High Level Event on 16 and 17 December 2025: https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/GA%20High-Level-Meeting [publicadministration.desa.un.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/G...> And this is where one particularly concerning bit of information troubled me: that there might be some "issue trading" at this high level, with issues that are not related in any way with the WSIS+20 process, traded for geopolitical reasons. And therefore, I heard that we, in our communities, should make sure that our countries' respective Ambassadors and Delegations at the UNGA be fully briefed about the importance of the WSIS+20 process, of our multistakeholder values, of the importance of the WSIS principles to the Internet and its repercussions beyond the Internet. This is a job for each and everyone of us, with our respective national delegations. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/wsis20__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com [pisanty.blogspot.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/pisanty.blogspot.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5c...> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 [linkedin.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614_...> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/twitter.com/apisanty__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uP...> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org [isoc.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.isoc.org__;!!PtGJab4!5ca8wb5uPOSo3Q00B...> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (14)
-
Alejandro Pisanty -
Amina Ramallan -
Angela Wibawa -
Anriette Esterhuysen -
Ashton-Hart, Nick -
Barrack Otieno -
Israel Rosas -
Jimson Olufuye -
Kiki Fong Lim -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Pari Esfandiari -
Sebastian Bellagamba -
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy -
Veni Markovski