This reflection on my fifth-year experience at the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) arrives a tad belatedly, I won’t feign that I intentionally delayed the release of this article. Truth be told, I took some time off to travel around Japan and came back to work with an inbox packed with hundreds of unread emails. Frankly speaking, I am still assimilating the outcomes of IGF 2023 and the substantial volume of information or initiatives derived from the forum.
In my fifth year at the IGF, my position as a program coordinator of the Asia Pacific Youth IGF remains (fortunately), but my interest and scope in Internet governance extended beyond youth engagement. Before I age out of my youth, I have a few thoughts to share on the discussions regarding youth participation and the sustainability of the IGF ecosystem in the context of the Global Digital Compact (GDC) and the WSIS+20 and IGF+20 Review process.
A year of record or progress?
IGF 2023 Kyoto marked a record-breaking year, not only did we receive the utmost Omotenashi – the Japanese hospitality – from the host throughout the entire conference, but this year’s forum itself also featured over 300 sessions and drew in over 6,000 participants attending on-site.
As one of the 38% of female attendees, I was fortunate enough to have secured multiple speaking roles to add my two cents on various topics at the Global Youth Summit, a DC session on Risk, opportunity and child safety in the age of AI, and a workshop on Leveraging AI to Support Gender Inclusivity, as well as the book launch of the second edition of the Youth Atlas.
This year’s IGF unfolded at a time of intensified global tension while we also witnessed a big leap in technological advancement, particularly in AI technology. Issues surrounding Internet fragmentation, cybersecurity during times of conflict or war, and the proliferation of mis- and disinformation in the age of AI took center stage in the debate. While AI was almost mentioned in every single session, other topics like data governance, digital divide, the Global Digital Compact (GDC), etc. were also discussed at length.
IGF 2023 might have been a record-breaking year for many, but it signifies a year of progress for me.
A base camp where people come and go?
I made my debut at the IGF in 2018 at the headquarters of UNESCO in Paris. As a newbie back then, I felt disoriented the majority of the time, navigating hours of meetings and social settings in the space. As years passed, my memories of that year’s forum were mostly a blur of busyness punctuated by hurried lunches of baguette sandwiches squeezed between meetings.
Fast forward to IGF 2019 Berlin, the Youth Track and Global Youth Summit were introduced, as well as the Parliamentary Track and other practices that laid the groundwork that we continue to build upon today. Since that year, the Global Youth Summit has become a steadfast base camp for many youth leaders and newcomers alike. It’s truly fascinating to admit that this year’s Youth Summit in Kyoto came close to having a full house.
But there came a moment of realization that my time as a youth would draw to a close soon when I began receiving invitations to bilateral meetings. While some lament the transient nature of young fellows in the IGF ecosystem, I perceive this transition differently.
Youth community: a greenhouse, orchard, or a mycorrhizal network?
The youth experience in the Internet governance discourse is akin to being nurtured in a greenhouse. Occasionally, the veterans are invited to pay a visit to admire the remarkable work within, share a few words, and take a few photos of this flourishing space before they depart.
Later, there were more people who would visit the greenhouse and spend an hour or two planting new seeds. Some enthusiasts even transformed the surroundings and extended the nursery into an orchard. This nurturing environment has helped numerous young trees to grow robustly, and now we witness these fruit-bearing trees producing fresh fruits for the community.
While the anticipation for the harvest moment is palpable, I am convinced that the youth community shouldn’t resemble a greenhouse or an orchard in the first place. Undoubtedly, it supported me through my early stages of development. However, what we genuinely need is a mycorrhizal network – a support system comparable to the connections between fungi and the roots of plants; such a network that transfers nutrients and promotes collective growth and thriving within the forest of such an entangled Internet governance ecosystem that extends to spaces beyond the IGF.
A world without IGF?
The IGF itself is one of the major outcomes stemming from the 2005 Tunis Agenda during the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Following a review in 2010, the IGF’s mandate was renewed for a five-year period (2011-2015). Subsequently, during the WSIS+10 review in 2015, its mandate was further extended for an additional 10 years (2016-2025). With the IGF currently being in its third mandate, the discourse naturally dawns upon the IGF and its extension in the upcoming WSIS+20 review process in 2025.
The destiny of IGF seems to rest in the hands of all stakeholders in this round, with the WSIS+20 and IGF+20 consultation drawing insights from the GDC – a proposal outlined in the UN Secretary-General’s report “Our Common Agenda” in September 2021, encapsulating multistakeholder-contributed output slated for adoption at the Summit of the Future in September 2024. Concurrently, the outcomes of the WSIS+20 are envisioned to contribute to a review of the UN’s 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.
As these processes fortify their alignment and technologies become more woven together with our everyday lives, there seems to be a silver lining on the horizon for the IGF mandate extending beyond 2025. This signals an opportunity for continuity and progress in fostering a more human-centered and multistakeholder approach to global digital transformation.
Nonetheless, were the IGF to close its chapter, we would forfeit years of history and the legacy of multistakeholder discussions on Internet policies. Our next generation would miss a platform to cast their influence on Internet policies that hold the potential to shape their own future, and the world would lose the essence of a space where the policymaking process was once democratized.