List of proposals for EuroDIG 2022: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 25: Line 25:
| 6 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre09_22 | Pre Event 9]] || Roberto Gaetano || EURALO || Civil society || 2022 marks the beginning of the UN International Decade of Indigenous Languages (IDIL2022-2032) – see https://en.unesco.org/idil2022-2032 and https://www.arcticpeoples.com/sagastallamin-un-language-decade. How do the communities that speak an indigenous language interact with the Internet? Does the Internet help in promoting the local diversity or does the globalisation play against the cultural and linguistic minorities? This topic has been addressed also at IGF Italia 2021, with a good discussion among the cultural and linguistic minorities in Italy, and it would be good to have a similar approach spanning over Europe. It should be also noted that the multilingualism on the internet is part of the work of the IGF Meaningful Access Policy Network.
| 6 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre09_22 | Pre Event 9]] || Roberto Gaetano || EURALO || Civil society || 2022 marks the beginning of the UN International Decade of Indigenous Languages (IDIL2022-2032) – see https://en.unesco.org/idil2022-2032 and https://www.arcticpeoples.com/sagastallamin-un-language-decade. How do the communities that speak an indigenous language interact with the Internet? Does the Internet help in promoting the local diversity or does the globalisation play against the cultural and linguistic minorities? This topic has been addressed also at IGF Italia 2021, with a good discussion among the cultural and linguistic minorities in Italy, and it would be good to have a similar approach spanning over Europe. It should be also noted that the multilingualism on the internet is part of the work of the IGF Meaningful Access Policy Network.
|- id="prop_7" class="a-a-l"
|- id="prop_7" class="a-a-l"
| 7 || currently open || Fabio Monnet || University of Geneva, EPFL, youth IGF || Academia || I would like to propose a podium discussion on dating algorithm. The idea is to open a discussion on dating algorithm of free to use applications, such as Tinder and Bumble and how they have an effect on inclusion in dating, psychology and how they make money. Transparency and discussion with stakeholders about the exisiting model I am in touch with scientists working on dating algorithms from EPFL. I also would like to invite company representatives, e.g. from Bumble, to the discussion.
| 7 || [[BigStage_2022#Bigstage_04_2022 | Big Stage]] || Fabio Monnet || University of Geneva, EPFL, youth IGF || Academia || I would like to propose a podium discussion on dating algorithm. The idea is to open a discussion on dating algorithm of free to use applications, such as Tinder and Bumble and how they have an effect on inclusion in dating, psychology and how they make money. Transparency and discussion with stakeholders about the exisiting model I am in touch with scientists working on dating algorithms from EPFL. I also would like to invite company representatives, e.g. from Bumble, to the discussion.
|- id="prop_8" class="a-a-l"
|- id="prop_8" class="a-a-l"
| 8 || currently open || Maia Simonishvili || The National Parliamentary Library of Georgia || Government || Universal Access and Digital Literacy create a basement for civil society development today. I would like to present possibilities of digital literacy and free educational opportunities in the field. For example, what might be done to make it possible for any citizen to access basic programming skills, digital education and contemporary knowledge to improve their lives and proficiency. We can share our experiences as a member of the women coding classes for gender equality and democracy.  
| 8 || [[BigStage_2022#Bigstage_01_2022 | Big Stage]] || Maia Simonishvili || The National Parliamentary Library of Georgia || Government || Universal Access and Digital Literacy create a basement for civil society development today. I would like to present possibilities of digital literacy and free educational opportunities in the field. For example, what might be done to make it possible for any citizen to access basic programming skills, digital education and contemporary knowledge to improve their lives and proficiency. We can share our experiences as a member of the women coding classes for gender equality and democracy.  
|- id="prop_9" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_9" class="c-c-o"
| 9 || currently open || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || Security for online telemedicine and supply chain access for citizens, hospitals, labs, and medical units, including ease of digital onboarding and awareness of use of devices or wearables for the citizen. Do all diverse groups of the population have the same rights of access and affordable access to online medicine including mobile health ?
| 9 || currently open || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || Security for online telemedicine and supply chain access for citizens, hospitals, labs, and medical units, including ease of digital onboarding and awareness of use of devices or wearables for the citizen. Do all diverse groups of the population have the same rights of access and affordable access to online medicine including mobile health ?
Line 39: Line 39:
| 13 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws01_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1]] || Xhoana SHEHU || ETNO || Private sector || 2. CROSS-CUTTING / OTHER ISSUES Digital technologies for environment: Digitalization and environmental sustainability go hand in hand. Digital solutions are a pre-requisite for achieving the EU Green Deal’s goals across different sectors of the economy and society thanks to their enabling potential measuring up to 15% of emission reductions resulting from full digitalization. How can greater connectivity and digital technologies unleash to reduce our impact on the environment? What technologies will support to achieve this enabling potential of the ICT and telecom sector?  
| 13 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws01_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1]] || Xhoana SHEHU || ETNO || Private sector || 2. CROSS-CUTTING / OTHER ISSUES Digital technologies for environment: Digitalization and environmental sustainability go hand in hand. Digital solutions are a pre-requisite for achieving the EU Green Deal’s goals across different sectors of the economy and society thanks to their enabling potential measuring up to 15% of emission reductions resulting from full digitalization. How can greater connectivity and digital technologies unleash to reduce our impact on the environment? What technologies will support to achieve this enabling potential of the ICT and telecom sector?  
|- id="prop_14" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_14" class="c-c-o"
| 14 || currently open || Wout de Natris || Internet Standards, Security and Safety Coalition || Other || Research shows that there is a huge gap between the curriculum tertiary educational facilities offer to their students and what industry and society as a whole expects them to deliver where knowledge of Internet and ICT security, Internet governance and architecture is concerned. This gap needs closing. This is of utmost importance for Europe in order to protect itself at higher levels of ICT security in general, as well as to ward off and prevent attacks at a more proficient level.
| 14 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Wout de Natris || Internet Standards, Security and Safety Coalition || Other || Research shows that there is a huge gap between the curriculum tertiary educational facilities offer to their students and what industry and society as a whole expects them to deliver where knowledge of Internet and ICT security, Internet governance and architecture is concerned. This gap needs closing. This is of utmost importance for Europe in order to protect itself at higher levels of ICT security in general, as well as to ward off and prevent attacks at a more proficient level.
|- id="prop_15" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_15" class="c-c-o"
| 15 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Karen McCabe, Constance Weise || IEEE || Technical community || Trustworthy AI and Certification. In April 2021, Europe published its AI package with the intention of making Europe a hub for trustworthy AI and the EESC has proposed that an independent body be entrusted with testing for bias, prejudice, discrimination, robustness, resilience, and, especially, safety. Companies could use certification programs to prove that their AI systems are transparent, trustworthy, and meet relevant ethical criteria, in line with European standards. Marks could recognize that a product, service, or system has been verified to meet relevant ethical criteria, which would contribute toward a greater level of confidence and demonstrate a proactive approach to building public trust in an AI system. A conversation about such programs in EuroDIG could help increase their use and effectiveness.
| 15 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Karen McCabe, Constance Weise || IEEE || Technical community || Trustworthy AI and Certification. In April 2021, Europe published its AI package with the intention of making Europe a hub for trustworthy AI and the EESC has proposed that an independent body be entrusted with testing for bias, prejudice, discrimination, robustness, resilience, and, especially, safety. Companies could use certification programs to prove that their AI systems are transparent, trustworthy, and meet relevant ethical criteria, in line with European standards. Marks could recognize that a product, service, or system has been verified to meet relevant ethical criteria, which would contribute toward a greater level of confidence and demonstrate a proactive approach to building public trust in an AI system. A conversation about such programs in EuroDIG could help increase their use and effectiveness.
Line 45: Line 45:
| 16 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Pierpaolo Marchese || Independent Consultant || Technical community || AI Deployments – In April 2021, the EU published a proposal to regulate AI deployments based on a risk management approach. The proposal has been considered in opposite ways, too limitative of digital innovation from somebodies, too mild and without significant effects from others. It is useful to debate the matter in Eurodig with the help of key stakeholders  
| 16 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Pierpaolo Marchese || Independent Consultant || Technical community || AI Deployments – In April 2021, the EU published a proposal to regulate AI deployments based on a risk management approach. The proposal has been considered in opposite ways, too limitative of digital innovation from somebodies, too mild and without significant effects from others. It is useful to debate the matter in Eurodig with the help of key stakeholders  
|- id="prop_17" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_17" class="c-c-o"
| 17 || currently open || Pierpaolo Marchese || Independent Consultant || Technical community || Gaia-X is a growing EU initiative ( https://www.gaia-x.eu/) to promote a federated cloud based on interoperability, data security and privacy. If successful, the initiative will affect the overall digital market and limit the power of the current gatekeeper platforms. In Eurodig It could be useful to better understand the Gaia-X technical model and the new perspectives it could open.  
| 17 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]] || Pierpaolo Marchese || Independent Consultant || Technical community || Gaia-X is a growing EU initiative ( https://www.gaia-x.eu/) to promote a federated cloud based on interoperability, data security and privacy. If successful, the initiative will affect the overall digital market and limit the power of the current gatekeeper platforms. In Eurodig It could be useful to better understand the Gaia-X technical model and the new perspectives it could open.  
|- id="prop_18" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_18" class="c-c-o"
| 18 || currently open || Julia Trzcińska || Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance e.V. || Civil society || Transparency in the digital sector. The need for guidelines and regulations on the data reporting and standardization is raising. What is the current state? What data on the technology development, energy consumption and e-waste is really available? What are the gaps? What are the solutions for filling those gaps? What regulations have been implemented and which directions should be considered?
| 18 || currently open || Julia Trzcińska || Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance e.V. || Civil society || Transparency in the digital sector. The need for guidelines and regulations on the data reporting and standardization is raising. What is the current state? What data on the technology development, energy consumption and e-waste is really available? What are the gaps? What are the solutions for filling those gaps? What regulations have been implemented and which directions should be considered?
|- id="prop_19" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_19" class="c-c-o"
| 19 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || The Internet Society believes the Internet is for everyone. It’s not just our privilege to use it, it’s also our collective responsibility to protect it. Over decades, the Internet has become a critical resource offering those with access virtually infinite opportunities to innovate and work together for the collective good. To protect it, we must illustrate what the Internet needs in order to work for everyone. We need a framework to analyse the potential impact of every new policy, business decision, technology, or trend on the Internet. This framework shall serve as the basis to carry out Internet impact assessments and define a best practice in decision-making processes.  
| 19 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || The Internet Society believes the Internet is for everyone. It’s not just our privilege to use it, it’s also our collective responsibility to protect it. Over decades, the Internet has become a critical resource offering those with access virtually infinite opportunities to innovate and work together for the collective good. To protect it, we must illustrate what the Internet needs in order to work for everyone. We need a framework to analyse the potential impact of every new policy, business decision, technology, or trend on the Internet. This framework shall serve as the basis to carry out Internet impact assessments and define a best practice in decision-making processes.  
|- id="prop_20" class="c-c-o"
|- id="prop_20" class="c-c-o"
| 20 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || The Internet Society believes in the importance of measuring specific aspects of the Internet: its resilience, the growing levels of centralisation and the disruptions and shutdowns that occur around the world. This information can help examine Internet trends, generate reports, and tell data-driven stories about how the Internet is evolving. At the Internet Society we have developed the Pulse platform – pulse.internetsociety.org – to help everyone gain deeper, data-driven insight into the Internet. We propose stakeholders to discuss on how to better gather, present and track metrics for this purpose.
| 20 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || The Internet Society believes in the importance of measuring specific aspects of the Internet: its resilience, the growing levels of centralisation and the disruptions and shutdowns that occur around the world. This information can help examine Internet trends, generate reports, and tell data-driven stories about how the Internet is evolving. At the Internet Society we have developed the Pulse platform – pulse.internetsociety.org – to help everyone gain deeper, data-driven insight into the Internet. We propose stakeholders to discuss on how to better gather, present and track metrics for this purpose.
Line 63: Line 63:
| 25 || currently open || Maia Simonishvili || The National Parliamentary Library of Georgia || Government || Cross-Cutting issues, which are connected for improvement of the lives of citizens Are Media Literacy, Health education, digital literacy, tools to prevent crimes and create more secured environment for people.  
| 25 || currently open || Maia Simonishvili || The National Parliamentary Library of Georgia || Government || Cross-Cutting issues, which are connected for improvement of the lives of citizens Are Media Literacy, Health education, digital literacy, tools to prevent crimes and create more secured environment for people.  
|- id="prop_26" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_26" class="ig-eco"
| 26 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub2 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws02_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 2]] || Xhoana Shehu || ETNO || Private sector || 3. DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE ECOSYSTEM Future of Internet Governance – an open and interoperable Internet: the model of the open internet must not be taken for granted. It has been challenged lately by the proposal of a new ‘New IP’ in international fora such ETSI and ITU. To protect our global and open internet, we have to come together as a global community and promote and perfect our multistakeholder model. What is the role of regional and sub-regional IGFs in framing the future of Internet? How should the standardization process be approached to promote Internet interoperability and openness? How to tackle the threats to the open Internet and promote a solid multistakeholder model?  
| 26 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub2 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws02_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 2]] || Xhoana Shehu || ETNO || Private sector || 3. DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE ECOSYSTEM Future of Internet Governance – an open and interoperable Internet: the model of the open internet must not be taken for granted. It has been challenged lately by the proposal of a new ‘New IP’ in international fora such ETSI and ITU. To protect our global and open internet, we have to come together as a global community and promote and perfect our multistakeholder model. What is the role of regional and sub-regional IGFs in framing the future of Internet? How should the standardization process be approached to promote Internet interoperability and openness? How to tackle the threats to the open Internet and promote a solid multistakeholder model?  
|- id="prop_27" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_27" class="ig-eco"
| 27 || currently open || James Crabbe || Wolfson College, Oxford University || Academia || How to involve China and Chinese delegates in the overall Governance ecosystem.
| 27 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]] || James Crabbe || Wolfson College, Oxford University || Academia || How to involve China and Chinese delegates in the overall Governance ecosystem.
|- id="prop_28" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_28" class="ig-eco"
| 28 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre09_22 | Pre Event 9]] || Nigel Hickson || UK DCMS || Government || I would propose that an issue this year should be the critical need to enhance multilingualism on the Internet not least through further promotion of International Domain Names (IDNs) and enhanced work to resolve the unacceptable situation regarding Universal Acceptance (the ability to use non-Latin scripts on the Internet). While the main issues are not Europe focussed it is Europe (whether governments, the technical community, business or other stakeholders which should be acting to solve the problems to help preserve a truly global Internet.  
| 28 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre09_22 | Pre Event 9]] || Nigel Hickson || UK DCMS || Government || I would propose that an issue this year should be the critical need to enhance multilingualism on the Internet not least through further promotion of International Domain Names (IDNs) and enhanced work to resolve the unacceptable situation regarding Universal Acceptance (the ability to use non-Latin scripts on the Internet). While the main issues are not Europe focussed it is Europe (whether governments, the technical community, business or other stakeholders which should be acting to solve the problems to help preserve a truly global Internet.  
|- id="prop_29" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_29" class="ig-eco"
| 29 || currently open || Nigel Hickson || UK DCMS || Government || To address the modalities of preparing for the UNGA discussions in 2025 concerning the renewal of the UN WSIS mandate. The preparations for the UN debate will be of critical importance, not least so that all stakeholders can have the opportunity to reflect on the WSIS mandate (derived from the 2003 and 2005 UN summits) and views on whether (and how) the UN IGF should be taken forward as well as on the current multi-stakeholder process for Internet Governance.  
| 29 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]] || Nigel Hickson || UK DCMS || Government || To address the modalities of preparing for the UNGA discussions in 2025 concerning the renewal of the UN WSIS mandate. The preparations for the UN debate will be of critical importance, not least so that all stakeholders can have the opportunity to reflect on the WSIS mandate (derived from the 2003 and 2005 UN summits) and views on whether (and how) the UN IGF should be taken forward as well as on the current multi-stakeholder process for Internet Governance.  
|- id="prop_30" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_30" class="ig-eco"
| 30 || currently open || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands Internet Governance Forum (NL IGF) & ECP | Platform for the Information Society || Civil society || The importance of safeguarding the inclusive multi-stakeholder ecosystem of Internet Governance. Now more than ever, it is crucial to preserve the open multi-stakeholder system. In the Netherlands, we have a long tradition of sustained public-private partnership. We believe this to be a crucial factor in creating a resilient digital society.
| 30 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]] || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands Internet Governance Forum (NL IGF) & ECP | Platform for the Information Society || Civil society || The importance of safeguarding the inclusive multi-stakeholder ecosystem of Internet Governance. Now more than ever, it is crucial to preserve the open multi-stakeholder system. In the Netherlands, we have a long tradition of sustained public-private partnership. We believe this to be a crucial factor in creating a resilient digital society.
|- id="prop_31" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_31" class="ig-eco"
| 31 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || In 2020 a thousands of intellectual and academicians have published the “Public Service Media and Public Service Internet manifesto” (among the first signatories Jurgen Habermas and Noam Chomsky). In this document they raise the issue that Europe – as did for media at the beginning of the XXth century – needs to do the same now for social media and suggest to apply the same solution to fix the bug of partizan media that was successfully implemented one hundred years ago: to create an Internet of Public Service. This intellectual provocation is not only an abstract thinking, but is a concrete way to reach the “open internet” that was conceived by its founding fathers and that has now been denied by the for-profit internet giants. Such a transversal topic could be represent a perfect topic for a plenary session of EuroDIG 2022. Here it is the link to the “manifesto”: https://gsis.at/2021/08/05/the-public-service-media-and-public-service-internet-manifesto-signed-by-jurgen-habermas-noam-chomsky-et-al/
| 31 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || In 2020 a thousands of intellectual and academicians have published the “Public Service Media and Public Service Internet manifesto” (among the first signatories Jurgen Habermas and Noam Chomsky). In this document they raise the issue that Europe – as did for media at the beginning of the XXth century – needs to do the same now for social media and suggest to apply the same solution to fix the bug of partizan media that was successfully implemented one hundred years ago: to create an Internet of Public Service. This intellectual provocation is not only an abstract thinking, but is a concrete way to reach the “open internet” that was conceived by its founding fathers and that has now been denied by the for-profit internet giants. Such a transversal topic could be represent a perfect topic for a plenary session of EuroDIG 2022. Here it is the link to the “manifesto”: https://gsis.at/2021/08/05/the-public-service-media-and-public-service-internet-manifesto-signed-by-jurgen-habermas-noam-chomsky-et-al/
|- id="prop_32" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_32" class="ig-eco"
| 32 || currently open || Hendrik Ike || GÉANT || Other || e-Infrastructures and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. GÉANT is a fundamental element of Europe’s e-infrastructure, delivering the pan-European GÉANT network for scientific excellence, research, education and innovation. Through its integrated catalogue of connectivity, collaboration and identity services, GÉANT provides users with highly reliable, unconstrained access to computing, analysis, storage, applications and other resources, to ensure that Europe remains at the forefront of research. As the goals of the European Commission and UN SDG’s become more closely intertwined, then a discussion of these are needed from a digital perspective, and what work e-Infrastructures have already conducted in order to help realise the goals. There will also be an insight into what work GÉANT is conducting as an organisation to meet sustainable targets, and an illustration of the problems (and opportunities) that we, and other e-infrastructures, are already encountering.  
| 32 || [[BigStage_2022#Bigstage_02_2022 | Big Stage]] || Hendrik Ike || GÉANT || Other || e-Infrastructures and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. GÉANT is a fundamental element of Europe’s e-infrastructure, delivering the pan-European GÉANT network for scientific excellence, research, education and innovation. Through its integrated catalogue of connectivity, collaboration and identity services, GÉANT provides users with highly reliable, unconstrained access to computing, analysis, storage, applications and other resources, to ensure that Europe remains at the forefront of research. As the goals of the European Commission and UN SDG’s become more closely intertwined, then a discussion of these are needed from a digital perspective, and what work e-Infrastructures have already conducted in order to help realise the goals. There will also be an insight into what work GÉANT is conducting as an organisation to meet sustainable targets, and an illustration of the problems (and opportunities) that we, and other e-infrastructures, are already encountering.  
|- id="prop_33" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_33" class="ig-eco"
| 33 || currently open || Peter Koch || DENIC eG & ISOC.DE e.V. || Technical community || multistakeholder washing – Almost any recent discussion regarding the Internet – or, more broadly: digital issues – bears the label “multistakeholder” – because it’s a “must”. When even strict top-down legislation or regulation is named “multistakeholder”, not only does the term lose its meaning: one of the reasons for multistakeholder in Internet governance was the Internet’s technical and operational complexity and the need for interdisciplinary conversation. How do we perform?  
| 33 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre04_22 | Pre Event 4]] || Peter Koch || DENIC eG & ISOC.DE e.V. || Technical community || multistakeholder washing – Almost any recent discussion regarding the Internet – or, more broadly: digital issues – bears the label “multistakeholder” – because it’s a “must”. When even strict top-down legislation or regulation is named “multistakeholder”, not only does the term lose its meaning: one of the reasons for multistakeholder in Internet governance was the Internet’s technical and operational complexity and the need for interdisciplinary conversation. How do we perform?  
|- id="prop_34" class="ig-eco"
|- id="prop_34" class="ig-eco"
| 34 || currently open || Vlad Ivanets || YouthDIG / Youth Board of CCTLD.RU || Civil society || The IGF, the reform of the forum, and its transformation into the IGF+. Should the forum remain a platform for discussion or should it become a place for decision-making? How will the members of the new MHLB be selected and nominated? To what limits will their power and influence be limited? How to avoid imbalances in stakeholder groups when the tech companies gain more and more significance?
| 34 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]] || Vlad Ivanets || YouthDIG / Youth Board of CCTLD.RU || Civil society || The IGF, the reform of the forum, and its transformation into the IGF+. Should the forum remain a platform for discussion or should it become a place for decision-making? How will the members of the new MHLB be selected and nominated? To what limits will their power and influence be limited? How to avoid imbalances in stakeholder groups when the tech companies gain more and more significance?
|- id="prop_35" class="hu-ri"
|- id="prop_35" class="hu-ri"
| 35 || currently open || Riccardo Nanni || University of Bologna || Academia || Individual self-determination in the context of the growing politicisation and economic relevance of (personal) data. This touches upon matters of digital literacy and public regulation.
| 35 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Riccardo Nanni || University of Bologna || Academia || Individual self-determination in the context of the growing politicisation and economic relevance of (personal) data. This touches upon matters of digital literacy and public regulation.
|- id="prop_36" class="hu-ri"
|- id="prop_36" class="hu-ri"
| 36 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre05_22 | Pre Event 5]] || Xianhong Hu || UNESCO || Intergovernmental organisation || The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digitalization and dependence on digital communications providers in Europe and beyond. The value of the Internet has been underlined, while we are more aware than ever of the power of corporations, governments and forces against human rights and sustainable development, crafting the system to violate rights to dignity, democracy, expression and privacy. Within their capacity to shape the national internet experiences, governments can play both negative and positive roles, in relation to the potential of the Internet and advanced ICTs to support human rights, democracy and sustainable development. On the negative side, Internet cut offs and intrusive cyberlaws can harm the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. On the positive side, states can regulate to ensure accessible pricing for Internet access, protection of privacy, media and information literacy, transparency for internet companies, and more. To improve the benefits and reduce harms, a comprehensive and credible mapping of each national internet space can provide evidence about issues where national policies are working, and those that need work. This is the significance of the Internet Universality ROAM principles (Rights, Open, Accessible to all, and Multistakeholderism) which is a mapping instrument that serves as an evidence-based approach to facilitate digital collaboration at regional and global levels and improve national Internet experiences.
| 36 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre05_22 | Pre Event 5]] || Xianhong Hu || UNESCO || Intergovernmental organisation || The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digitalization and dependence on digital communications providers in Europe and beyond. The value of the Internet has been underlined, while we are more aware than ever of the power of corporations, governments and forces against human rights and sustainable development, crafting the system to violate rights to dignity, democracy, expression and privacy. Within their capacity to shape the national internet experiences, governments can play both negative and positive roles, in relation to the potential of the Internet and advanced ICTs to support human rights, democracy and sustainable development. On the negative side, Internet cut offs and intrusive cyberlaws can harm the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. On the positive side, states can regulate to ensure accessible pricing for Internet access, protection of privacy, media and information literacy, transparency for internet companies, and more. To improve the benefits and reduce harms, a comprehensive and credible mapping of each national internet space can provide evidence about issues where national policies are working, and those that need work. This is the significance of the Internet Universality ROAM principles (Rights, Open, Accessible to all, and Multistakeholderism) which is a mapping instrument that serves as an evidence-based approach to facilitate digital collaboration at regional and global levels and improve national Internet experiences.
Line 93: Line 93:
| 40 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub1 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1]] || Jutta Croll || Stiftung Digitale Chancen || Civil society || DSA and DMA – what collateral damage will come into effect with the new regulatory regime
| 40 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub1 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1]] || Jutta Croll || Stiftung Digitale Chancen || Civil society || DSA and DMA – what collateral damage will come into effect with the new regulatory regime
|- id="prop_41" class="hu-ri"
|- id="prop_41" class="hu-ri"
| 41 || currently open || Desara Dushi || VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL || Academia || In August 2021 Apple announced that its new IOS version would include a set of features designed to protect children from sexual abuse. One of the features includes a tool in the Messages app that by using an image scanner trained on sexually explicit content identifies images that “contain nudity” and warns child users when receiving or sending such images. The identification is done while preserving end-to-end encryption of the messages. Apple claims they do not get access to the messages. This announcement, while welcome by child protection NGOs, was highly contested by privacy experts. On the other hand, Google is already conducting a similar activity by scanning gmail and Drive for child sexual abuse material. It would be interesting to discuss the balance between child protection, illegal content and privacy in a multistakeholder panel.
| 41 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]] || Desara Dushi || VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL || Academia || In August 2021 Apple announced that its new IOS version would include a set of features designed to protect children from sexual abuse. One of the features includes a tool in the Messages app that by using an image scanner trained on sexually explicit content identifies images that “contain nudity” and warns child users when receiving or sending such images. The identification is done while preserving end-to-end encryption of the messages. Apple claims they do not get access to the messages. This announcement, while welcome by child protection NGOs, was highly contested by privacy experts. On the other hand, Google is already conducting a similar activity by scanning gmail and Drive for child sexual abuse material. It would be interesting to discuss the balance between child protection, illegal content and privacy in a multistakeholder panel.
|- id="prop_42" class="i-a-e"
|- id="prop_42" class="i-a-e"
| 42 || currently open || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || Futurist || Other || How can we make the existing Work from Home or work from Remote Hubs, Even More Successful for the business owner, employee and clients of the business so as to reduce carbon emissions, reduce infrastucture costs for expanding urban populations and increase wellness? How should the internet and its applications grow to enable this ?
| 42 || currently open || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || Futurist || Other || How can we make the existing Work from Home or work from Remote Hubs, Even More Successful for the business owner, employee and clients of the business so as to reduce carbon emissions, reduce infrastucture costs for expanding urban populations and increase wellness? How should the internet and its applications grow to enable this ?
|- id="prop_43" class="i-a-e"
|- id="prop_43" class="i-a-e"
| 43 || currently open || Josef Noll || Basic Internet Foundation || Civil society || I’d like to suggest the “free access to information on the Internet” for every person in Europe. When it comes to the access to information (text, pictures), why do I need a mobile broadband subscription to “get going”. The European Roaming enforcement ist a good step into the right direction, though it does only cover those who have a mobile broadband subscription. Talking about #LeaveNoOneBehind, every single person should have free access to information in all networks – as part of the participation in the digital society.
| 43 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub1 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1]] || Josef Noll || Basic Internet Foundation || Civil society || I’d like to suggest the “free access to information on the Internet” for every person in Europe. When it comes to the access to information (text, pictures), why do I need a mobile broadband subscription to “get going”. The European Roaming enforcement is a good step into the right direction, though it does only cover those who have a mobile broadband subscription. Talking about #LeaveNoOneBehind, every single person should have free access to information in all networks – as part of the participation in the digital society.
|- id="prop_44" class="i-a-e"
|- id="prop_44" class="i-a-e"
| 44 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]] || Riccardo Nanni || University of Bologna || Academia || Supply problems for microchips have become a major issue for market verticals in 2021. The EU is stepping up its game by planning a EU Chips Act. What consequences for EU industry and individual/organisational users?
| 44 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]] || Riccardo Nanni || University of Bologna || Academia || Supply problems for microchips have become a major issue for market verticals in 2021. The EU is stepping up its game by planning a EU Chips Act. What consequences for EU industry and individual/organisational users?
Line 117: Line 117:
| 52 || currently open || Roberto Gaetano || EURALO || Civil society || The pandemic has obliged us all to make greater use of online tools, not only for holding online meetings but also for online learning. In the majority of cases, organisations and individuals had to cope with this changed situation under emergency. Given the raise in use of online tools, a question arises about whether these tools introduce a bias, i.e. whether all users are treated equally, or whether there are limitations in terms of accessibility for specific groups of people. The situation in the e-learning domain is particularly important: also in this case most academic institutions had to cope with the sudden change, but there are institutions that have made the strategic choice decades ago to intensively use online tools, and it would be interesting to hear from them – one that comes to my mind is the Open University. Also, there is some academic work that addresses the need to provide a solid certification of attendance to online events – see, for instance, the PINVOX algorithm https://online-journals.org/index.php/i-jet/article/view/2123/2325. It could be interesting to discuss this issue and the implication for a future that, even once the impact of the pandemic is reduced, will rely on online tools.
| 52 || currently open || Roberto Gaetano || EURALO || Civil society || The pandemic has obliged us all to make greater use of online tools, not only for holding online meetings but also for online learning. In the majority of cases, organisations and individuals had to cope with this changed situation under emergency. Given the raise in use of online tools, a question arises about whether these tools introduce a bias, i.e. whether all users are treated equally, or whether there are limitations in terms of accessibility for specific groups of people. The situation in the e-learning domain is particularly important: also in this case most academic institutions had to cope with the sudden change, but there are institutions that have made the strategic choice decades ago to intensively use online tools, and it would be interesting to hear from them – one that comes to my mind is the Open University. Also, there is some academic work that addresses the need to provide a solid certification of attendance to online events – see, for instance, the PINVOX algorithm https://online-journals.org/index.php/i-jet/article/view/2123/2325. It could be interesting to discuss this issue and the implication for a future that, even once the impact of the pandemic is reduced, will rely on online tools.
|- id="prop_53" class="i-a-e"
|- id="prop_53" class="i-a-e"
| 53 || currently open || Peter Koch || DENIC eG & ISOC.DE e.V. || Technical community || The return of gated access – When the Internet evolved from the telco networks, it provided freedom to innovate and freedom to connect. The smart edge – dumb core paradigm enabled a variety of end systems and open source software solutions to grow the Internet where strongly regulated – and expensive – end systems had dominated the telco world. 30-ish years ahead, today, we’re back in time: platforms provide modern minitel or BTX-like services and for end systems the app stores have replaced the regulators’ seals of approval. None of the main actors are based in Europe and the European regulation isn’t necessarily preventing concentration.
| 53 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || Peter Koch || DENIC eG & ISOC.DE e.V. || Technical community || The return of gated access – When the Internet evolved from the telco networks, it provided freedom to innovate and freedom to connect. The smart edge – dumb core paradigm enabled a variety of end systems and open source software solutions to grow the Internet where strongly regulated – and expensive – end systems had dominated the telco world. 30-ish years ahead, today, we’re back in time: platforms provide modern minitel or BTX-like services and for end systems the app stores have replaced the regulators’ seals of approval. None of the main actors are based in Europe and the European regulation isn’t necessarily preventing concentration.
|- id="prop_54" class="i-a-e"
|- id="prop_54" class="i-a-e"
| 54 || currently open || Jutta Croll || Stiftung Digitale Chancen || Civil society || Digitalisation in rural areas, lessons learned during the pandemic
| 54 || currently open || Jutta Croll || Stiftung Digitale Chancen || Civil society || Digitalisation in rural areas, lessons learned during the pandemic
Line 143: Line 143:
| 65 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giorgi Jokhadze || Council of Europe, Cybercrime Programme Office || Intergovernmental organisation || Building accountability, transparency and trust for cybercrime action: The matters of trust and accountability of the law enforcement action on cybercrime and electronic evidence toward the general public are recurrent themes for many international discussions involving strong civil society presence, such as EuroDIG. We believe that such discussions need to be re-visited on a continuous basis, as the dialogue between criminal justice authorities, cybersecurity experts, academia, civil society, data protection community and other relevant actors on trust, transparency and accountability should contribute to shaping criminal justice policies against cybercrime to the same degree as the analysis of current threats and trends in cyberspace.
| 65 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giorgi Jokhadze || Council of Europe, Cybercrime Programme Office || Intergovernmental organisation || Building accountability, transparency and trust for cybercrime action: The matters of trust and accountability of the law enforcement action on cybercrime and electronic evidence toward the general public are recurrent themes for many international discussions involving strong civil society presence, such as EuroDIG. We believe that such discussions need to be re-visited on a continuous basis, as the dialogue between criminal justice authorities, cybersecurity experts, academia, civil society, data protection community and other relevant actors on trust, transparency and accountability should contribute to shaping criminal justice policies against cybercrime to the same degree as the analysis of current threats and trends in cyberspace.
|- id="prop_66" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_66" class="s-a-c"
| 66 || currently open || Giorgi Jokhadze || Council of Europe, Cybercrime Programme Office || Intergovernmental organisation || Cooperation between cybercrime and cybersecurity communities for secure cyberspace: Whilst not limited anymore merely to technical and operational cooperation matters between law enforcement and CSIRTs, the synergy between these two sectors is rapidly increasing and expanding in many directions, leading to policies and standards (e.g. by ENISA, Europol, etc.) adopted to ensure such cooperation in many aspects ranging from threat intelligence and common training to joint operations and operational agreements. This discussion could also showcase a variety of ongoing initiatives and projects bringing these two communities together for the goal of ensuring safer cyberspace.
| 66 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giorgi Jokhadze || Council of Europe, Cybercrime Programme Office || Intergovernmental organisation || Cooperation between cybercrime and cybersecurity communities for secure cyberspace: Whilst not limited anymore merely to technical and operational cooperation matters between law enforcement and CSIRTs, the synergy between these two sectors is rapidly increasing and expanding in many directions, leading to policies and standards (e.g. by ENISA, Europol, etc.) adopted to ensure such cooperation in many aspects ranging from threat intelligence and common training to joint operations and operational agreements. This discussion could also showcase a variety of ongoing initiatives and projects bringing these two communities together for the goal of ensuring safer cyberspace.
|- id="prop_67" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_67" class="s-a-c"
| 67 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub2 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws02_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 2]] || Karen McCabe, Constance Weise || IEEE || Technical community || Standards in Support of Cybersecurity. The importance of this topic is growing daily. With a rapidly increasing number of digital devices, amount of data, and digitizing services, cybersecurity efforts have struggled to keep pace. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of any product or service is critical, as is convening all of the affected stakeholders in the process. The standards creation process can help bring together a wide variety of stakeholders to have the conversations needed, and to contribute to structuring the process of making systems safe and trustworthy for all. This is an especially pertinent topic for Europe this year, as it recently enacted the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services.
| 67 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub2 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#ws02_22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 2]] || Karen McCabe, Constance Weise || IEEE || Technical community || Standards in Support of Cybersecurity. The importance of this topic is growing daily. With a rapidly increasing number of digital devices, amount of data, and digitizing services, cybersecurity efforts have struggled to keep pace. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of any product or service is critical, as is convening all of the affected stakeholders in the process. The standards creation process can help bring together a wide variety of stakeholders to have the conversations needed, and to contribute to structuring the process of making systems safe and trustworthy for all. This is an especially pertinent topic for Europe this year, as it recently enacted the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services.
Line 149: Line 149:
| 68 || currently open || Saliha Mustafić || Student/University || Academia || Awareness about various forms of cybercrime and measures to prevent and tackle such issues is the only way to combat cybercrime. Cybercrime continues to evolve, with new threats every year. Abstinence from internet use is not the solution. Instead recognizing cybercrime and understanding the prevention and management strategy is important. Awareness needs to start from a young age, and crime should be prevented not cured.  
| 68 || currently open || Saliha Mustafić || Student/University || Academia || Awareness about various forms of cybercrime and measures to prevent and tackle such issues is the only way to combat cybercrime. Cybercrime continues to evolve, with new threats every year. Abstinence from internet use is not the solution. Instead recognizing cybercrime and understanding the prevention and management strategy is important. Awareness needs to start from a young age, and crime should be prevented not cured.  
|- id="prop_69" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_69" class="s-a-c"
| 69 || currently open || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange AG || Private sector || The traditional view of privacy and security – and the way these rights are enshrined e.g. in the GDPR – is that the end-user must be in charge, deciding who to trust with their data and having full awareness of where the data goes. However, Internet platforms and device makers increasingly take an opposite view, turning their products and services into opaque boxes which transfer data through encrypted channels within a closed ecosystem, where the company controls both the end-user interface and the cloud servers that receive, process and store the user’s information. They claim that this is the only workable way to protect the user’s privacy and security, as average users do not have the technical and practical skill to make the right choices for themselves. However, smarter users increasingly have a hard time in controlling what their applications and devices do, as control points like a home network firewall, a DNS-based advertising blocker (PiHole) or an ISP content security service get bypassed. Can these different views around security coexist? Should users be granted the ultimate right to control what their applications and devices do, and how?
| 69 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub1 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1]] || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange AG || Private sector || The traditional view of privacy and security – and the way these rights are enshrined e.g. in the GDPR – is that the end-user must be in charge, deciding who to trust with their data and having full awareness of where the data goes. However, Internet platforms and device makers increasingly take an opposite view, turning their products and services into opaque boxes which transfer data through encrypted channels within a closed ecosystem, where the company controls both the end-user interface and the cloud servers that receive, process and store the user’s information. They claim that this is the only workable way to protect the user’s privacy and security, as average users do not have the technical and practical skill to make the right choices for themselves. However, smarter users increasingly have a hard time in controlling what their applications and devices do, as control points like a home network firewall, a DNS-based advertising blocker (PiHole) or an ISP content security service get bypassed. Can these different views around security coexist? Should users be granted the ultimate right to control what their applications and devices do, and how?
|- id="prop_70" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_70" class="s-a-c"
| 70 || currently open || Hendrik Ike || GÉANT || Other || In 2019, 84% of all European individuals between the ages of 16 to 74 regularly used the internet. For any of those individuals to be able to visit a webpage, an internet certificate or ‘badge of validity’ is required for the site to be accessible and secure for the general public. Internet certificates are also needed for mail servers, database connections and much more. The rules and policies needed to issue and assess internet certificates are regulated by the CA/B forum, a governance body made up of the most active certification authorities and vendors of Internet browser software. The issuing and subsequent validity of internet certificates is largely out of European hands. This has several negative consequences, with the most notable being the increasingly impromptu decision making of a unified body of non-European browser software vendors. Stringent rulings, such as lowering the duration of all certificate’s validity to a period of one year or increasing the level of auditing required to issue a credible certificate, have direct consequences for European internet usage.  
| 70 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]] || Hendrik Ike || GÉANT || Other || In 2019, 84% of all European individuals between the ages of 16 to 74 regularly used the internet. For any of those individuals to be able to visit a webpage, an internet certificate or ‘badge of validity’ is required for the site to be accessible and secure for the general public. Internet certificates are also needed for mail servers, database connections and much more. The rules and policies needed to issue and assess internet certificates are regulated by the CA/B forum, a governance body made up of the most active certification authorities and vendors of Internet browser software. The issuing and subsequent validity of internet certificates is largely out of European hands. This has several negative consequences, with the most notable being the increasingly impromptu decision making of a unified body of non-European browser software vendors. Stringent rulings, such as lowering the duration of all certificate’s validity to a period of one year or increasing the level of auditing required to issue a credible certificate, have direct consequences for European internet usage.  
|- id="prop_71" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_71" class="s-a-c"
| 71 || currently open || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || We continue to observe governments around the world and in Europe, making policy choices that lead to undermining encryption, which puts people’s personal security and privacy at risk, threatens economic development, and detracts from the Internet’s global trustworthiness. The Internet Society stands against policies or legislation that would encourage or force companies to weaken or limit the use of strong encryption. These threats may be direct, such as calling for law enforcement access to encrypted data, or indirect, such as changes to intermediary liability rules that force companies to monitor user content. It is relevant to explain the importance of encryption for societies and the current attempts to legislate against it.
| 71 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Technical community || We continue to observe governments around the world and in Europe, making policy choices that lead to undermining encryption, which puts people’s personal security and privacy at risk, threatens economic development, and detracts from the Internet’s global trustworthiness. The Internet Society stands against policies or legislation that would encourage or force companies to weaken or limit the use of strong encryption. These threats may be direct, such as calling for law enforcement access to encrypted data, or indirect, such as changes to intermediary liability rules that force companies to monitor user content. It is relevant to explain the importance of encryption for societies and the current attempts to legislate against it.
|- id="prop_72" class="s-a-c"
|- id="prop_72" class="s-a-c"
| 72 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Desara Dushi || VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL || Academia || This year saw a big step in the fight against cybercrime with the adoption of the second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention. With a history of critical discussions regarding cybercrime, EuroDIG is the best space to discuss about the impact of this additional protocol to international collaboration in the fight against cybercrime. Is it the solution, or only the first step towards better protection against cybercrime? What will be its impact in practice?  
| 72 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub3 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Desara Dushi || VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL || Academia || This year saw a big step in the fight against cybercrime with the adoption of the second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention. With a history of critical discussions regarding cybercrime, EuroDIG is the best space to discuss about the impact of this additional protocol to international collaboration in the fight against cybercrime. Is it the solution, or only the first step towards better protection against cybercrime? What will be its impact in practice?  
Line 163: Line 163:
| 75 || currently open || André Melancia || Technical community || Technical community || Tech corner: Current state of technology, including Cloud, IoT, IPv6, Security (HTTPS, DNSSEC, etc.), BGP (etc.), and more... What can we count on today? What has changed in the last year (or so)? What do we need for the near future? What stakeholders need to work harder to improve?
| 75 || currently open || André Melancia || Technical community || Technical community || Tech corner: Current state of technology, including Cloud, IoT, IPv6, Security (HTTPS, DNSSEC, etc.), BGP (etc.), and more... What can we count on today? What has changed in the last year (or so)? What do we need for the near future? What stakeholders need to work harder to improve?
|- id="prop_76" class="t-a-o"
|- id="prop_76" class="t-a-o"
| 76 || currently open || Peter Van Roste || CENTR || Technical community || As a tech industry we take pride in our multistakeholder approach to developing technical standards and policies that affect acces and use of the technical infrastructure. What are the gaps in this process in Europe? Is there such a thing as democratic deficit in a multistakeholder environment? This exploration could take the form of a session, but could also be a recurring question raised at a wider range of sessions.  
| 76 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa03_22_sub2 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#pre04_22 | Pre Event 4]] || Peter Van Roste || CENTR || Technical community || As a tech industry we take pride in our multistakeholder approach to developing technical standards and policies that affect acces and use of the technical infrastructure. What are the gaps in this process in Europe? Is there such a thing as democratic deficit in a multistakeholder environment? This exploration could take the form of a session, but could also be a recurring question raised at a wider range of sessions.  
|- id="prop_77" class="t-a-o"
|- id="prop_77" class="t-a-o"
| 77 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange AG || Private sector || One of the current philosophical debates in Internet governance regards the bridging of the requests for more “digital sovereignty” by governments and local Internet communities with the need to preserve the global, borderless nature of the Internet. Internet governance circles are often in denial, suggesting that the recognition of any type of national sovereignty would imply breaking up the net into “splinternets” and creating “fragmentation” that would destroy the value of the network itself. On the other hand, proposals to turn the Internet into a more traditional telecommunication network are being pushed even at the Internet protocol level. Is there a middle ground that can keep the world together? How would the technical architecture and the governance of a “Westphalian Internet” look like, and what are we missing to achieve it?
| 77 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa04_22_sub2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2]] || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange AG || Private sector || One of the current philosophical debates in Internet governance regards the bridging of the requests for more “digital sovereignty” by governments and local Internet communities with the need to preserve the global, borderless nature of the Internet. Internet governance circles are often in denial, suggesting that the recognition of any type of national sovereignty would imply breaking up the net into “splinternets” and creating “fragmentation” that would destroy the value of the network itself. On the other hand, proposals to turn the Internet into a more traditional telecommunication network are being pushed even at the Internet protocol level. Is there a middle ground that can keep the world together? How would the technical architecture and the governance of a “Westphalian Internet” look like, and what are we missing to achieve it?
Line 183: Line 183:
*In the case of Quad–9, a free service designed to provide safe access to the DNS is prohibited from operating due to a judicial dispute over copyright infringement. Is seeking a legal outcome by shutting down a neutral part of DNS architecture merited? This discussion will focus on the global, voluntary, and resilient nature of the DNS, highlighting its existing governance processes and offering advice on protecting it. Ideas for investment and collaborative approaches to achieve desired public policy outcomes will also be presented. Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
*In the case of Quad–9, a free service designed to provide safe access to the DNS is prohibited from operating due to a judicial dispute over copyright infringement. Is seeking a legal outcome by shutting down a neutral part of DNS architecture merited? This discussion will focus on the global, voluntary, and resilient nature of the DNS, highlighting its existing governance processes and offering advice on protecting it. Ideas for investment and collaborative approaches to achieve desired public policy outcomes will also be presented. Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
|- id="prop_82"  
|- id="prop_82"  
| 82 || currently open || Andrea Beccalli || icann.org || Technical community || Impact Assessments: EU Initiatives - Aligning Objectives and Outcomes. A host of initiatives and proposals on Internet-related regulation will have significant effects on existing governance structures, underlying technical operations, and the experience of Internet users. Nothing less than the resilience and interoperability of the Internet is at stake. This discussion will offer examples, call for systematic impact assessments, and recommend sources of expertise to help achieve policy outcomes while enhancing the Internet for all users. Do these initiatives support the objective of Digital Sovereignty for Europe? Policy initiatives to examine may include:
| 82 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]]<br />[[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa02_22_sub1 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1]] || Andrea Beccalli || icann.org || Technical community || Impact Assessments: EU Initiatives - Aligning Objectives and Outcomes. A host of initiatives and proposals on Internet-related regulation will have significant effects on existing governance structures, underlying technical operations, and the experience of Internet users. Nothing less than the resilience and interoperability of the Internet is at stake. This discussion will offer examples, call for systematic impact assessments, and recommend sources of expertise to help achieve policy outcomes while enhancing the Internet for all users. Do these initiatives support the objective of Digital Sovereignty for Europe? Policy initiatives to examine may include:
*Cyber Resilience Act
*Cyber Resilience Act
*e- Evidence Legislation
*e- Evidence Legislation
Line 193: Line 193:
Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
|- id="prop_83"  
|- id="prop_83"  
| 83 || currently open || Andrea Beccalli || icann.org || Technical community || NIS2 Implementation: Advice for Citizens and Member States. An examination of how prioritization and enforcement or NIS2 provisions can achieve desired objectives efficiently and effectively, while minimizing unintended effects on human rights, economic activity, or technological integrity of communication systems. What are the impacts on supply chain, business practices and specific sectors? What technical configurations will be affected. Examples of good practices and member state experiences to date will encourage discussion of shared objectives. Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
| 83 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub2 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2]] || Andrea Beccalli || icann.org || Technical community || NIS2 Implementation: Advice for Citizens and Member States. An examination of how prioritization and enforcement or NIS2 provisions can achieve desired objectives efficiently and effectively, while minimizing unintended effects on human rights, economic activity, or technological integrity of communication systems. What are the impacts on supply chain, business practices and specific sectors? What technical configurations will be affected. Examples of good practices and member state experiences to date will encourage discussion of shared objectives. Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR
|- id="prop_84"  
|- id="prop_84"  
| 84 || currently open || Alève Mine || Zurich AR/VR Meetup || Technical community || Regulation of quantum computing and -communication after all? Non-quantum inputs and physical structure define the complete system and are observable.
| 84 || currently open || Alève Mine || Zurich AR/VR Meetup || Technical community || Regulation of quantum computing and -communication after all? Non-quantum inputs and physical structure define the complete system and are observable.
Line 201: Line 201:
| 86 || currently open || Alève Mine || Zurich AR/VR Meetup || Technical community || All the companies that won't be able to afford compliance to new norms. The expected impact of this. How to have them gather forces or otherwise find a way to withstand the transition together
| 86 || currently open || Alève Mine || Zurich AR/VR Meetup || Technical community || All the companies that won't be able to afford compliance to new norms. The expected impact of this. How to have them gather forces or otherwise find a way to withstand the transition together
|- id="prop_87"  
|- id="prop_87"  
| 87 || currently open || Polina Malaja || centr.org || Technical community || Upcoming EU proposal on tackling the child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online. The legislative proposal on this is expected to be published by the end of Q1 2022.
| 87 || [[Consolidated_programme_2022#fa01_22_sub1 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1]] || Polina Malaja || centr.org || Technical community || Upcoming EU proposal on tackling the child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online. The legislative proposal on this is expected to be published by the end of Q1 2022.
|- id="prop_88"  
|- id="prop_88"  
| 88 || currently open || Mark Carvell || || || UK Online Safety Bill – I hope there will be space in EuroDIG this year for the UK IGF/DCMS to present and explain these proposals and the sanctions that would apply to Facebook etc.
| 88 || [[BigStage_2022#Bigstage_03_2022 | Big Stage]] || Mark Carvell || || || UK Online Safety Bill – I hope there will be space in EuroDIG this year for the UK IGF/DCMS to present and explain these proposals and the sanctions that would apply to Facebook etc.
|}
|}


[[Category:2022]]
[[Category:2022]]

Latest revision as of 17:37, 13 April 2022

During the call for issues for EuroDIG we received 79 submissions in the period from 1 November 2021 till 3 January 2022 for the EuroDIG 2022 programme planning. You can find the breakdown here.

Categories are colored as follows:

 Access & literacy   Development of IG ecosystem   Human rights & data protection   Innovation and economic issues   Media & content   Cross cutting / other issues   Security and crime   Technical & operational issues 

You may sort the table by clicking at head of the column. To restore the original sorting, just reload the page.

You can also download the list of proposals as of 3 Jan. 2022 as pdf file.

Proposals submitted during proposal review phase / Planning Meeting / programme review phase