List of proposals for EuroDIG 2023: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 27: Line 27:
! Suggested issue
! Suggested issue
|- id="prop_1"
|- id="prop_1"
| 1 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || What is the optimal ecosystem to accelerate the space of data driven health technologies ? Are there better ways to build back stronger and faster ? What should we pursue and what should we shed from the experience of using telemedicine during covid ?
| 1 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre08_23 | Pre 8 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || What is the optimal ecosystem to accelerate the space of data driven health technologies ? Are there better ways to build back stronger and faster ? What should we pursue and what should we shed from the experience of using telemedicine during covid ?
|- id="prop_2"
|- id="prop_2"
| 2 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || Doctor, medical staff, medical equipment and service access is in shortage and will reach a crisis soon. How can the internet and emerging technologies be used to assist healthcare, research, collaboration for service delivery and development, Including education?  
| 2 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre08_23 | Pre 8 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || Doctor, medical staff, medical equipment and service access is in shortage and will reach a crisis soon. How can the internet and emerging technologies be used to assist healthcare, research, collaboration for service delivery and development, Including education?  
|- id="prop_3"
|- id="prop_3"
| 3 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands IGF (NL IGF) || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and the three categories of causes (technical, political, economic) and the two areas that are affected by internet fragmentation (economic, human rights).
| 3 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands IGF (NL IGF) || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and the three categories of causes (technical, political, economic) and the two areas that are affected by internet fragmentation (economic, human rights).
Line 35: Line 35:
| 4 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash03_23 | Flash 3 ]] || Dennis Redeker || Universität Bremen || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Quantum technology, including quantum cryptography, might upend the current system of (asymmetric) encryption including on the protocol level (if it ever comes to full implementation). Europe and European stakeholders should be prepared to co-design new post-quantum encryption, protocols and legal and ethical guidelines. This issue relates to privacy and human rights as well as demanding (potentially) new international agreements and institutions to govern a potential quantum future.  
| 4 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash03_23 | Flash 3 ]] || Dennis Redeker || Universität Bremen || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Quantum technology, including quantum cryptography, might upend the current system of (asymmetric) encryption including on the protocol level (if it ever comes to full implementation). Europe and European stakeholders should be prepared to co-design new post-quantum encryption, protocols and legal and ethical guidelines. This issue relates to privacy and human rights as well as demanding (potentially) new international agreements and institutions to govern a potential quantum future.  
|- id="prop_5"
|- id="prop_5"
| 5 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC DDHT || Other || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || In the media we are increasingly hearing about the lack of awareness and sensitivity to secure the medical internet of things, associated devices and services, access, privacy of data and all matters of risk for the internet. It can be a matter of life or death if a device or service is compromised, or data corrupted. The need to ensure the UN Sendai principles is also key. As customized patient care from home, which is remote, becomes more internet dependent in real time, should an enhanced set of ethical, protection and technical internet standards, for devices and services, for the medical internet of things be developed and adopted ? The patient is a vulnerable individual in the community increasingly dependent on the internet.  
| 5 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre08_23 | Pre 8 ]] || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC DDHT || Other || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || In the media we are increasingly hearing about the lack of awareness and sensitivity to secure the medical internet of things, associated devices and services, access, privacy of data and all matters of risk for the internet. It can be a matter of life or death if a device or service is compromised, or data corrupted. The need to ensure the UN Sendai principles is also key. As customized patient care from home, which is remote, becomes more internet dependent in real time, should an enhanced set of ethical, protection and technical internet standards, for devices and services, for the medical internet of things be developed and adopted ? The patient is a vulnerable individual in the community increasingly dependent on the internet.  
|- id="prop_6"
|- id="prop_6"
| 6 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Mathieu Paapst || University of Groningen || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || In Europe, we not only have the GDPR, but we also have the ePrivacy Directive. This contains rules concerning the use of cookies, local storage, pixels, API calls, and other resources that can store or read data from the device of an end user. According to these rules, the end users should be informed about the function and purposes of these resources. In general, we can distinguish five purposes: Statistics, Statistics-anonymous, marketing/tracking, Functional and Preferences. The larger problem is that there is no consensus about those purposes. For example, one website may speak about the "functional purpose" for a particular cookie, whereas other websites call the purpose for that same cookie "Technical pur", " Essential", or " strictly necessary". "Statistics" or " analytics" are sometimes also called "Performance", and marketing/tracking is sometimes known as "ad-storage". Preferences Cookies are in some jurisdictions known as functionality. This is of course not transparent to the end-users. We should therefore find consensus in order to standardize the names of these purposes.  
| 6 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Mathieu Paapst || University of Groningen || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || In Europe, we not only have the GDPR, but we also have the ePrivacy Directive. This contains rules concerning the use of cookies, local storage, pixels, API calls, and other resources that can store or read data from the device of an end user. According to these rules, the end users should be informed about the function and purposes of these resources. In general, we can distinguish five purposes: Statistics, Statistics-anonymous, marketing/tracking, Functional and Preferences. The larger problem is that there is no consensus about those purposes. For example, one website may speak about the "functional purpose" for a particular cookie, whereas other websites call the purpose for that same cookie "Technical pur", " Essential", or " strictly necessary". "Statistics" or " analytics" are sometimes also called "Performance", and marketing/tracking is sometimes known as "ad-storage". Preferences Cookies are in some jurisdictions known as functionality. This is of course not transparent to the end-users. We should therefore find consensus in order to standardize the names of these purposes.  
Line 41: Line 41:
| 7 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Pekka Mustonen || The Pirate Party of Finland || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || While technology is developing and our everyday life is getting more and more digital we also have people who don't have access to any of this. There still are many senior citizens who have never touched a computer/mobile phone. How can we make sure that everyone is still able to survive in more and more digital world?  
| 7 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Pekka Mustonen || The Pirate Party of Finland || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || While technology is developing and our everyday life is getting more and more digital we also have people who don't have access to any of this. There still are many senior citizens who have never touched a computer/mobile phone. How can we make sure that everyone is still able to survive in more and more digital world?  
|- id="prop_8"
|- id="prop_8"
| 8 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Frédéric Cohen || UN DESA/IGF - DC DDHT || Intergovernmental organisation || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The use of robotics as a model of life to develop health technologies  
| 8 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre08_23 | Pre 8 ]] || Frédéric Cohen || UN DESA/IGF - DC DDHT || Intergovernmental organisation || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The use of robotics as a model of life to develop health technologies  
|- id="prop_9"
|- id="prop_9"
| 9 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Esa Sirkkunen || Tampere University || Academia || || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet and media platforms<br />update 2023/01/26<br />https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/134781/978-952-03-2110-9.pdf?sequence=2<br />Strengthening the communication rights of citizens is essential for developing platform politics for Europe and Finland. Here are some tentative recommendations:<br />
| 9 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Esa Sirkkunen || Tampere University || Academia || || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet and media platforms<br />update 2023/01/26<br />https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/134781/978-952-03-2110-9.pdf?sequence=2<br />Strengthening the communication rights of citizens is essential for developing platform politics for Europe and Finland. Here are some tentative recommendations:<br />
Line 63: Line 63:
| 14 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Wout de Natris || De Natris Consult || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation. Is Internet fragmentation to be prevented at all cost or is/are there a scenario or scenarios that would make fragmentation the preferable option? If so, what are they? Is the Internet already fragmented looking at it from e.g. a Chinese or Russian perspective?  
| 14 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Wout de Natris || De Natris Consult || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation. Is Internet fragmentation to be prevented at all cost or is/are there a scenario or scenarios that would make fragmentation the preferable option? If so, what are they? Is the Internet already fragmented looking at it from e.g. a Chinese or Russian perspective?  
|- id="prop_15"
|- id="prop_15"
| 15 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Wout de Natris || De Natris Consult || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || || The future of Internet Governance. At the WSIS +20 advise will be provided on whether to continue with the IGF (and thus all NRIs, like EuroDIG). This merits a few timely actions and the answering of questions. 1. Has Internet governance a role after 2025? 2. Is there a role for the IGF after 2025? 3. If so, what are the decisive arguments? 4. How to win over those in doubt of multistakeholderism? 5. What are the successes of the IGF system? 6. Does the current model allow for tangible outcomes? These answers will assist those working towards WSIS +20 and provide the arguments in favour of continuation that can be used on meetings on Internet governance in general and the IGF in particular, also the ones that will be organised by our community and assist the makers of all the presentations that will have to be made globally. To do an inventory within EuroDIG would be a good start and a powerful message.
| 15 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Wout de Natris || De Natris Consult || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || || The future of Internet Governance. At the WSIS +20 advise will be provided on whether to continue with the IGF (and thus all NRIs, like EuroDIG). This merits a few timely actions and the answering of questions. 1. Has Internet governance a role after 2025? 2. Is there a role for the IGF after 2025? 3. If so, what are the decisive arguments? 4. How to win over those in doubt of multistakeholderism? 5. What are the successes of the IGF system? 6. Does the current model allow for tangible outcomes? These answers will assist those working towards WSIS +20 and provide the arguments in favour of continuation that can be used on meetings on Internet governance in general and the IGF in particular, also the ones that will be organised by our community and assist the makers of all the presentations that will have to be made globally. To do an inventory within EuroDIG would be a good start and a powerful message.
|- id="prop_16"
|- id="prop_16"
| 16 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash06_23 | Flash 6 ]] || Marko Ala-Fossi || Tampere University || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Together with a group of Nordic colleagues from Denmark , Norway and Greenland we are currently preparing a research project under a tentative title "The backbone of digitalisation: A New Nordic agenda for digital infrastructure studies."  
| 16 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash06_23 | Flash 6 ]] || Marko Ala-Fossi || Tampere University || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Together with a group of Nordic colleagues from Denmark , Norway and Greenland we are currently preparing a research project under a tentative title "The backbone of digitalisation: A New Nordic agenda for digital infrastructure studies."  
Line 71: Line 71:
| 18 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Luiza Brandao || Alexander von Humboldt Foundation || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Cross-border data flow is part of the internet global functioning, and has receiving attention from policymakers, regulators and courts in Europe, such as in the GDPR and the cases Schrems I and II, or at international negotiation to establish a new agreement with the USA, a digital single market, or to operate in the global digital trade. The proposals regarding the international aspects enabled by the internet also need to dialogue with the technical and architect aspects the networking. It includes intricate logics of operating traffic and routing internationally, which very often are restricted to the engineering field. The importance of the global internet for a digital future, as well as the need to guarantee human rights, such as privacy and freedom of expression, across multiple countries, combined with the threats of the internet's fragmentation and lost of its global nature justify the need to consider technical, political, economical, and social aspects of cross-border data flow. Multidisciplinary and public interest oriented dialogues, in spaces as the Euro DIG, are crucial to move forward in the comprehension and effective regulation of transnational data flows.  
| 18 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Luiza Brandao || Alexander von Humboldt Foundation || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Cross-border data flow is part of the internet global functioning, and has receiving attention from policymakers, regulators and courts in Europe, such as in the GDPR and the cases Schrems I and II, or at international negotiation to establish a new agreement with the USA, a digital single market, or to operate in the global digital trade. The proposals regarding the international aspects enabled by the internet also need to dialogue with the technical and architect aspects the networking. It includes intricate logics of operating traffic and routing internationally, which very often are restricted to the engineering field. The importance of the global internet for a digital future, as well as the need to guarantee human rights, such as privacy and freedom of expression, across multiple countries, combined with the threats of the internet's fragmentation and lost of its global nature justify the need to consider technical, political, economical, and social aspects of cross-border data flow. Multidisciplinary and public interest oriented dialogues, in spaces as the Euro DIG, are crucial to move forward in the comprehension and effective regulation of transnational data flows.  
|- id="prop_19"
|- id="prop_19"
| 19 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Chris Buckridge || RIPE NCC || Technical community || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Is the UN commitment to a multistakeholder approach to Internet governance (as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda) at risk as we move towards the WSIS 20-year review? Is there a need to better shape, define and evolve multistakeholder processes and modalities for Internet governance?
| 19 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Chris Buckridge || RIPE NCC || Technical community || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Is the UN commitment to a multistakeholder approach to Internet governance (as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda) at risk as we move towards the WSIS 20-year review? Is there a need to better shape, define and evolve multistakeholder processes and modalities for Internet governance?
|- id="prop_20"
|- id="prop_20"
| 20 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Cybersecurity by Design - Building in Resilience Cloud security technologies are procedures and technologies designed to address external and internal threats to an organisation’s security. Despite ongoing technology improvements, gaps in cloud forensics have been found involving a number of stakeholders, including cloud service providers, cloud application developers, and cloud service users. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of products or services 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, as it recently proposed in the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services. https://engagestandards.ieee.org/cybersecurity.html
| 20 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Cybersecurity by Design - Building in Resilience Cloud security technologies are procedures and technologies designed to address external and internal threats to an organisation’s security. Despite ongoing technology improvements, gaps in cloud forensics have been found involving a number of stakeholders, including cloud service providers, cloud application developers, and cloud service users. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of products or services 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, as it recently proposed in the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services. https://engagestandards.ieee.org/cybersecurity.html
Line 89: Line 89:
| 27 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Mikko Salo || Faktabaari || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Digital information literacy is a modern civic skill that underpins participation in democratic decision-making. Finland is renowned for its high literacy rate, and the teaching of multiple literacies has been integrated into current curricula from early childhood education onwards. However, on digital platforms we all are confronted with a bewildering flood of information that they may not be able to filter out with the skills they have acquired in the school community and at home: claims about products by influencers, search results tailored by commercial algorithms, cleverly scripted propaganda and authorisations to track online behaviour or physical movement in urban space hidden behind countless 'yes' buttons. It is therefore important to strengthen the digital information literacy of all the web users, especially young people, in order to identify how we are being influenced online. Finnish Faktabaari has recently published within EDMO NORDIS project a Digital Information Literacy Guide for citizens in the digital age also in English and would be interested to compare views on how to concretely build awareness and engage people for healthier digital information ecosystems: https://faktabaari.fi/dil/digital-information-literacy-guide/
| 27 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Mikko Salo || Faktabaari || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Digital information literacy is a modern civic skill that underpins participation in democratic decision-making. Finland is renowned for its high literacy rate, and the teaching of multiple literacies has been integrated into current curricula from early childhood education onwards. However, on digital platforms we all are confronted with a bewildering flood of information that they may not be able to filter out with the skills they have acquired in the school community and at home: claims about products by influencers, search results tailored by commercial algorithms, cleverly scripted propaganda and authorisations to track online behaviour or physical movement in urban space hidden behind countless 'yes' buttons. It is therefore important to strengthen the digital information literacy of all the web users, especially young people, in order to identify how we are being influenced online. Finnish Faktabaari has recently published within EDMO NORDIS project a Digital Information Literacy Guide for citizens in the digital age also in English and would be interested to compare views on how to concretely build awareness and engage people for healthier digital information ecosystems: https://faktabaari.fi/dil/digital-information-literacy-guide/
|- id="prop_28"
|- id="prop_28"
| 28 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Desara Dushi || Vrije Universiteit Brussel || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || In May 2022 the European Commission proposed a “Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse” material online. The proposal provides a uniform approach to detecting and reporting child sexual abuse imposing obligations on online service providers. But it has been criticized for including measures which put the vital integrity of secure communications at risk and opening the door for a range of authoritarian surveillance tactics. The proposal allows the scanning of private communication with the purpose of searching not only for verified illegal child sexual abuse material (CSAM), but also for new photos and videos, as well as evidence of text-based “grooming”. Is this proposal balanced and proportional or will this mark the end of end-to-end encryption? Despite several safeguards, should providers have a duty to scan our conversations? In the long debates of child protection and privacy so far it seems that children have always been the ones to be sacrificed and this proposal is trying to change the situation. Can we have both privacy and child protection online without either one diminishing the other? Is this regulation the solution to child sexual abuse online? Can we fight these types of crime by changing technical standards?
| 28 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Desara Dushi || Vrije Universiteit Brussel || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || In May 2022 the European Commission proposed a “Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse” material online. The proposal provides a uniform approach to detecting and reporting child sexual abuse imposing obligations on online service providers. But it has been criticized for including measures which put the vital integrity of secure communications at risk and opening the door for a range of authoritarian surveillance tactics. The proposal allows the scanning of private communication with the purpose of searching not only for verified illegal child sexual abuse material (CSAM), but also for new photos and videos, as well as evidence of text-based “grooming”. Is this proposal balanced and proportional or will this mark the end of end-to-end encryption? Despite several safeguards, should providers have a duty to scan our conversations? In the long debates of child protection and privacy so far it seems that children have always been the ones to be sacrificed and this proposal is trying to change the situation. Can we have both privacy and child protection online without either one diminishing the other? Is this regulation the solution to child sexual abuse online? Can we fight these types of crime by changing technical standards?
|- id="prop_29"
|- id="prop_29"
| 29 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The fragmentation of the Internet is pressing issue for Europe as well as the world at large. Governments and businesses across the world are increasingly making risky decisions that have the potential to adversely impact the open, global Internet - and they might not even know it. Risks to the Internet’s infrastructure can take many shapes - regulation of internetworking, sanctions impacting the availability of and trustworthiness of the Internet’s infrastructure, dangers to data security, and centralization of control - and can lead to geographical, political or experiential fragmentation of the Internet. This not only impacts the efficiency, agility and interoperability offered by the Internet but also has severe impacts on the global economy, innovation and access.
| 29 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The fragmentation of the Internet is pressing issue for Europe as well as the world at large. Governments and businesses across the world are increasingly making risky decisions that have the potential to adversely impact the open, global Internet - and they might not even know it. Risks to the Internet’s infrastructure can take many shapes - regulation of internetworking, sanctions impacting the availability of and trustworthiness of the Internet’s infrastructure, dangers to data security, and centralization of control - and can lead to geographical, political or experiential fragmentation of the Internet. This not only impacts the efficiency, agility and interoperability offered by the Internet but also has severe impacts on the global economy, innovation and access.
Line 103: Line 103:
| 34 || [[YOUthDIG_2023 | YOU<sup>th</sup>DIG]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || We would like to discuss the impact of poor data and misinformation on young people. Is there some particularity valid for this group of stakeholders? We would like to look into the question whether young people want greater data security and what they are willing to pay for that.
| 34 || [[YOUthDIG_2023 | YOU<sup>th</sup>DIG]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || We would like to discuss the impact of poor data and misinformation on young people. Is there some particularity valid for this group of stakeholders? We would like to look into the question whether young people want greater data security and what they are willing to pay for that.
|- id="prop_35"
|- id="prop_35"
| 35 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre03_23 | Pre 3 ]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || We would like to discuss the role of data accuracy as a tool for law enforcement authorities and those institutions enforcing intellectual property rights (and eventually consumer protection ones). Some registries as well as registrars (as part of the DNS) introduced self-regulatory measures to increase the data accuracy, what is the effectiveness from the viewpoint of the organisations representing law enforcement, intellectual property rights or consumer protection.
| 35 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre06_23 | Pre 6 ]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || We would like to discuss the role of data accuracy as a tool for law enforcement authorities and those institutions enforcing intellectual property rights (and eventually consumer protection ones). Some registries as well as registrars (as part of the DNS) introduced self-regulatory measures to increase the data accuracy, what is the effectiveness from the viewpoint of the organisations representing law enforcement, intellectual property rights or consumer protection.
|- id="prop_36"
|- id="prop_36"
| 36 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || Fake news, disinformation and manipulation: How the last 5 years saw extreme-right wing rulers get elected based on lies (USA, Brazil, Brexit, Italy, etc.), and what the Internet and media need to do to fight populism and misinformation to support truly Democratic processes. Having fact-checkers doesn't work (there's fact-checkers to check other fact-checkers, all have lost all credibility). Normal newspapers and media channels have lost journalistic integrity. What measures should be taken? How can we guarantee credible and verifiable content on the Internet? What legislative steps should be taken to prevent extreme-right funding of bots and sites spreading misinformation? Etc.
| 36 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || Fake news, disinformation and manipulation: How the last 5 years saw extreme-right wing rulers get elected based on lies (USA, Brazil, Brexit, Italy, etc.), and what the Internet and media need to do to fight populism and misinformation to support truly Democratic processes. Having fact-checkers doesn't work (there's fact-checkers to check other fact-checkers, all have lost all credibility). Normal newspapers and media channels have lost journalistic integrity. What measures should be taken? How can we guarantee credible and verifiable content on the Internet? What legislative steps should be taken to prevent extreme-right funding of bots and sites spreading misinformation? Etc.
Line 113: Line 113:
| 39 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Callum Voge || Internet Society || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Both the European Union and the United Kingdom have proposed new rules that seek to improve safety online. While these rules are well intended, both proposals take an approach that places an obligation on online communication service providers to screen private communications to detect harmful content. This obligation would, in practice, push service providers to either weaken or remove end-to-end encryption entirely. Encryption is an integral building block for the open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy Internet. Decisions made in the EU or the UK have global appeal and would be copied by other government around the world, including those that would exploit the loss of encryption for political control and censorship. Relevant documents: EU proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual UK Online Safety Bill  
| 39 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Callum Voge || Internet Society || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Both the European Union and the United Kingdom have proposed new rules that seek to improve safety online. While these rules are well intended, both proposals take an approach that places an obligation on online communication service providers to screen private communications to detect harmful content. This obligation would, in practice, push service providers to either weaken or remove end-to-end encryption entirely. Encryption is an integral building block for the open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy Internet. Decisions made in the EU or the UK have global appeal and would be copied by other government around the world, including those that would exploit the loss of encryption for political control and censorship. Relevant documents: EU proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual UK Online Safety Bill  
|- id="prop_40"
|- id="prop_40"
| 40 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Sébastien Bachollet || Interne Society France (&) EURALO || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Improving Digital cooperation is a key priority of the United Nations both at the global level and local level. Building on the roadmap for digital cooperation which suggested strengthening the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ecosystem, it is essential to foster a multi-stakeholder approach and improve digital cooperation at the national and local levels. Cooperation between European IGFs, local and regional (NRIs), and between NRIs and the European institutions is key to enabling tangible outcomes for stakeholders.Improving Multi-stakeholder fora is a key priority for Internet end users and the other stakeholder groups. Their participation at all levels (national, regional and global) is very important for the various actors but also for the future of Internet Governance.Key questions arise: what role could the IGF and NRIs play after 2025? How to strengthen multi stakeholder cooperation at the local and regional level? How to take the messages developed at those levels to the global IGFs? How to encourage tangible outcomes for Internet users?
| 40 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Sébastien Bachollet || Interne Society France (&) EURALO || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Improving Digital cooperation is a key priority of the United Nations both at the global level and local level. Building on the roadmap for digital cooperation which suggested strengthening the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ecosystem, it is essential to foster a multi-stakeholder approach and improve digital cooperation at the national and local levels. Cooperation between European IGFs, local and regional (NRIs), and between NRIs and the European institutions is key to enabling tangible outcomes for stakeholders.Improving Multi-stakeholder fora is a key priority for Internet end users and the other stakeholder groups. Their participation at all levels (national, regional and global) is very important for the various actors but also for the future of Internet Governance.Key questions arise: what role could the IGF and NRIs play after 2025? How to strengthen multi stakeholder cooperation at the local and regional level? How to take the messages developed at those levels to the global IGFs? How to encourage tangible outcomes for Internet users?
|- id="prop_41"
|- id="prop_41"
| 41 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Lucien Castex || Internet Governance and Regulation Research Group, CIS CNRS || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and human rights. Is Internet fragmentation already there? Access restrictions, automated customisation, regulation have resulted in divergences in the way content and services are available to internet users. How should we assess the impact of the ‘splintering’ of the internet on Human Rights in the wake of the EU legislative agenda? The UN Secretary-General' report, Our Common Agenda, proposes a Global Digital Compact expected to outline shared principles and address key digital issues such as avoiding Internet fragmentation and applying human rights online as well as improving digital cooperation. How can EU commitment to promoting the development of a single, open, neutral, free and secure Internet be combined with a human right centric approach amid a tense geopolitical environment? This topic is particularly important for European Stakeholders in the “times of trouble”.
| 41 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Lucien Castex || Internet Governance and Regulation Research Group, CIS CNRS || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and human rights. Is Internet fragmentation already there? Access restrictions, automated customisation, regulation have resulted in divergences in the way content and services are available to internet users. How should we assess the impact of the ‘splintering’ of the internet on Human Rights in the wake of the EU legislative agenda? The UN Secretary-General' report, Our Common Agenda, proposes a Global Digital Compact expected to outline shared principles and address key digital issues such as avoiding Internet fragmentation and applying human rights online as well as improving digital cooperation. How can EU commitment to promoting the development of a single, open, neutral, free and secure Internet be combined with a human right centric approach amid a tense geopolitical environment? This topic is particularly important for European Stakeholders in the “times of trouble”.
|- id="prop_42"
|- id="prop_42"
| 42 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || THE MANIFESTO OF PUBLIC SERVICE INTERNET TWO YEARS LATER: the manifesto about PSI signed by Habermas and Chomsky among many others, imagined that a different Internet is possible. a model based on public service principle, and different from the merely commercial one proposed by Internet Platforms giants as well as diverse from the model of social control proposed by China. What was seen at the time of its publication as a visionary proposal, now that EU rules over the platforms are entering in force (GPDR, data protection, DSA-DMA), seems possible and affordable. Having a debate around this proposal (and other similar, such as the "Solid" project of Tim Berners Lee) at EuroDIG 2023 seems very timely and appropriate, to check if a European way to the Internet of the future is really possible.  
| 42 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || THE MANIFESTO OF PUBLIC SERVICE INTERNET TWO YEARS LATER: the manifesto about PSI signed by Habermas and Chomsky among many others, imagined that a different Internet is possible. a model based on public service principle, and different from the merely commercial one proposed by Internet Platforms giants as well as diverse from the model of social control proposed by China. What was seen at the time of its publication as a visionary proposal, now that EU rules over the platforms are entering in force (GPDR, data protection, DSA-DMA), seems possible and affordable. Having a debate around this proposal (and other similar, such as the "Solid" project of Tim Berners Lee) at EuroDIG 2023 seems very timely and appropriate, to check if a European way to the Internet of the future is really possible.  
|- id="prop_43"
|- id="prop_43"
| 43 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Giacomo Mazzone || rai || Press || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The arrival of DSA-DMA, the implementation of the GDPR and of the Audiovisual Media Directive, and of the EU new code of practice of internet platforms will finally create the conditions for a sanitization of the on-line ecosystem and to tackle disinformation, misinformation and their diffusion over the web. would be useful to make a point within the organizations that are active in this field to which kind of implementation is needed to be the more effective and the more protective for citizens without harming human rights. Organizations such as EDMO and the national hubs created by EU to fight disinformation, the EC team in charge of the application of the code of practice and projects such as the MPM - Media Pluralism Monitor and the guidelines for digital and media literacy are the interlocutors to be invited to join such collective reflection.
| 43 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Giacomo Mazzone || rai || Press || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The arrival of DSA-DMA, the implementation of the GDPR and of the Audiovisual Media Directive, and of the EU new code of practice of internet platforms will finally create the conditions for a sanitization of the on-line ecosystem and to tackle disinformation, misinformation and their diffusion over the web. would be useful to make a point within the organizations that are active in this field to which kind of implementation is needed to be the more effective and the more protective for citizens without harming human rights. Organizations such as EDMO and the national hubs created by EU to fight disinformation, the EC team in charge of the application of the code of practice and projects such as the MPM - Media Pluralism Monitor and the guidelines for digital and media literacy are the interlocutors to be invited to join such collective reflection.
Line 135: Line 135:
| 50 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub3_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 3 ]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || HOPE. «EU candidate states and their integration into the digital European legal space». In 2022, Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova declared their desire to join the EU in response to Russia’s aggressive war on the European continent. In addition to these countries, the current European Union enlargement program contains several other candidates, including a group of the Western Balkan countries and Turkey. But to what extent the legislation and infrastructure of these states are in line with current EU digital policies, laws, and technical requirements? How can the legal framework for Internet regulation in these countries be restructures to comply with European jurisdiction? What efforts and means are planned to be taken to reduce the technical differences and smoothly integrate the new states into the EU infrastructure landscape? What should be done about some still existing ‘restrictive’ local laws that contradict the humanitarian and legal foundations of Europe? Encouraging newcomers to join the EU, the Internet community, with the participation of parliamentarians, legal experts, and other stakeholders, should give a realistic perspective to the upcoming processes along the way.
| 50 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub3_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 3 ]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || HOPE. «EU candidate states and their integration into the digital European legal space». In 2022, Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova declared their desire to join the EU in response to Russia’s aggressive war on the European continent. In addition to these countries, the current European Union enlargement program contains several other candidates, including a group of the Western Balkan countries and Turkey. But to what extent the legislation and infrastructure of these states are in line with current EU digital policies, laws, and technical requirements? How can the legal framework for Internet regulation in these countries be restructures to comply with European jurisdiction? What efforts and means are planned to be taken to reduce the technical differences and smoothly integrate the new states into the EU infrastructure landscape? What should be done about some still existing ‘restrictive’ local laws that contradict the humanitarian and legal foundations of Europe? Encouraging newcomers to join the EU, the Internet community, with the participation of parliamentarians, legal experts, and other stakeholders, should give a realistic perspective to the upcoming processes along the way.
|- id="prop_51"
|- id="prop_51"
| 51 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub1_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || || RISK. «False Flag Participation». The participation of different stakeholders and organisations is crucial for Internet governance nature, but is it really equal, reliable, and sufficiently balanced? A brief observation of the latest IG events revealed that some participants and organisations are not what they try to seem. Quite often behind the screen of ‘civil society’, ‘academia’, ‘private sector’ and ‘tech community’ pro-government initiatives, gongo organisations, financial interests lobbyists, impostors or even detractors can be found. Do organisers of IG initiatives make enough effort to check and confirm that participants and organisations really belong to the groups they declare and speak from? Isn’t it a time for local and international IG communities to develop and implement some kind of filters or other tools for more transparent, trustworthy and equitable representation? This question is to be addressed to the secretariats and organising committees of IG initiatives, NRIs representatives, and reliable and verified participants from civil society, tech community, business, and academia.
| 51 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub1_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || || RISK. «False Flag Participation». The participation of different stakeholders and organisations is crucial for Internet governance nature, but is it really equal, reliable, and sufficiently balanced? A brief observation of the latest IG events revealed that some participants and organisations are not what they try to seem. Quite often behind the screen of ‘civil society’, ‘academia’, ‘private sector’ and ‘tech community’ pro-government initiatives, gongo organisations, financial interests lobbyists, impostors or even detractors can be found. Do organisers of IG initiatives make enough effort to check and confirm that participants and organisations really belong to the groups they declare and speak from? Isn’t it a time for local and international IG communities to develop and implement some kind of filters or other tools for more transparent, trustworthy and equitable representation? This question is to be addressed to the secretariats and organising committees of IG initiatives, NRIs representatives, and reliable and verified participants from civil society, tech community, business, and academia.
|- id="prop_52"
|- id="prop_52"
| 52 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || RESILIENCE. «The Visible Impact of Sanctions on the Internet Infrastructure and Community». The EU began imposing its sanctions on Russia in March 2014. By now, the 9th package of Western sanctions has already been announced against authoritarian regime, and Russia has become the world leader in the number of restrictive measures imposed on the country. But can we as a global Internet community feel the real impact of political, financial, technological, and industrial sanctions, or have the ‘canceling’ actions of the private sector and civil society proved to be more effective against the Russian authorities? Has Russia’s disconnection from SWIFT affected the spread of disinformation in Western countries (and what are the actual figures)? How has the banning of software for state corporations affected their destructive activities? Has the influence of pro-Russian political cells and ‘expert groups’ decreased in media due to the complication of funding and travelling (or did it rather affect academics and civil society)? Can sanctions and secondary sanctions affect the stability and connectivity of the Internet? Can the huge relocation of IT specialists from Russia affect the European labor market? Any other positive or negative VISIBLE outcomes of the Western sanctions for IG ecosystem and global Internet infrastructure? All these questions need a separate discussion between high-level speakers, business reps, civil society, researches, monitoring groups, and others.
| 52 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Vladislav Ivanets || Free Moscow University || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || RESILIENCE. «The Visible Impact of Sanctions on the Internet Infrastructure and Community». The EU began imposing its sanctions on Russia in March 2014. By now, the 9th package of Western sanctions has already been announced against authoritarian regime, and Russia has become the world leader in the number of restrictive measures imposed on the country. But can we as a global Internet community feel the real impact of political, financial, technological, and industrial sanctions, or have the ‘canceling’ actions of the private sector and civil society proved to be more effective against the Russian authorities? Has Russia’s disconnection from SWIFT affected the spread of disinformation in Western countries (and what are the actual figures)? How has the banning of software for state corporations affected their destructive activities? Has the influence of pro-Russian political cells and ‘expert groups’ decreased in media due to the complication of funding and travelling (or did it rather affect academics and civil society)? Can sanctions and secondary sanctions affect the stability and connectivity of the Internet? Can the huge relocation of IT specialists from Russia affect the European labor market? Any other positive or negative VISIBLE outcomes of the Western sanctions for IG ecosystem and global Internet infrastructure? All these questions need a separate discussion between high-level speakers, business reps, civil society, researches, monitoring groups, and others.
Line 153: Line 153:
| 59 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Emilia Zalewska || NASK, Youth IGF Poland || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || If one had to decide what are the recent, most trendy words in new technologies, “metaverse” would definitely be one of them. Big tech companies are already investing tons of funds in creating a new, completely virtual world in which the humanity will work, learn, do business, spend free time and connect with others. Whether we share their enthusiasm or not, the level of global interest indicates that sooner or later at least elements of the metaverse will start to become more widely used. Even now, some platforms of this type are already quite popular, especially among younger users. For this reason, we should already be thinking about the potential risks and challenges of the metaverse and whether we have sufficient tools to counter them. For example, will the current regulations, like DSA or GDPR be able to provide sufficient level of protection for users, their data and privacy on such platforms? So far, technological breakthroughs have taken policy-makers by surprise, perhaps now there is a possibility to prepare for one of them in advance.
| 59 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Emilia Zalewska || NASK, Youth IGF Poland || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || If one had to decide what are the recent, most trendy words in new technologies, “metaverse” would definitely be one of them. Big tech companies are already investing tons of funds in creating a new, completely virtual world in which the humanity will work, learn, do business, spend free time and connect with others. Whether we share their enthusiasm or not, the level of global interest indicates that sooner or later at least elements of the metaverse will start to become more widely used. Even now, some platforms of this type are already quite popular, especially among younger users. For this reason, we should already be thinking about the potential risks and challenges of the metaverse and whether we have sufficient tools to counter them. For example, will the current regulations, like DSA or GDPR be able to provide sufficient level of protection for users, their data and privacy on such platforms? So far, technological breakthroughs have taken policy-makers by surprise, perhaps now there is a possibility to prepare for one of them in advance.
|- id="prop_60"
|- id="prop_60"
| 60 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#opening_plenary_23 | Opening plenary ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Sorene Assefa Shifa || Cyber Czar || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || Several AU-led initiatives have been implemented at the continental level, including the Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa 2020- 2030, which sets out an overarching strategy for Africa's Digital Transformation, as well as the Data Policy Framework for Digital ID, the Digital Trade Protocol of African Continental Free Trade Area (AFCFTA), the Malabo Convention on Cybersecurity & Personal Data Protection, and the Lomé Declaration on Cybersecurity & fight against Cybercrime, plus other endeavours to enable a resilient digital future. Nonetheless, there is still a disparity in the level of readiness for digital transformation between countries. Lack of investment in digital transformation at the Infrastructure, Policy Implementation, and Digital Skills are unnerving challenges yet to address in Africa.WSIS envisions an information society that is knowledge-based, inclusive, and people-centered, in which everyone can create, access, use, and share information. In preparing for the Global Digital Compact, a collective effort and shared responsibility are essential. Processes such as WSIS and IGF outcomes should lay the groundwork for the future we want, which allows for all stakeholders to participate and share responsibility.SESSION OBJECTIVES 1.Discuss current and future digital cooperation between Europe and Africa.2.Sharing best practices and lessons learned from citizens of the two continents.
| 60 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#opening_plenary_23 | Opening plenary ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5]] || Sorene Assefa Shifa || Cyber Czar || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || Several AU-led initiatives have been implemented at the continental level, including the Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa 2020- 2030, which sets out an overarching strategy for Africa's Digital Transformation, as well as the Data Policy Framework for Digital ID, the Digital Trade Protocol of African Continental Free Trade Area (AFCFTA), the Malabo Convention on Cybersecurity & Personal Data Protection, and the Lomé Declaration on Cybersecurity & fight against Cybercrime, plus other endeavours to enable a resilient digital future. Nonetheless, there is still a disparity in the level of readiness for digital transformation between countries. Lack of investment in digital transformation at the Infrastructure, Policy Implementation, and Digital Skills are unnerving challenges yet to address in Africa.WSIS envisions an information society that is knowledge-based, inclusive, and people-centered, in which everyone can create, access, use, and share information. In preparing for the Global Digital Compact, a collective effort and shared responsibility are essential. Processes such as WSIS and IGF outcomes should lay the groundwork for the future we want, which allows for all stakeholders to participate and share responsibility.SESSION OBJECTIVES 1.Discuss current and future digital cooperation between Europe and Africa.2.Sharing best practices and lessons learned from citizens of the two continents.
|- id="prop_61"
|- id="prop_61"
| 61'''*''' || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash04_23 | Flash 4]] || Soledad Magnone || Tampere University, CRITICAL project || Academia || || || || || || || || || The session would be a presentation by Reijo Kupiainen (cc'd) from CRITICAL group at Tampere University, specialised on media, information and digital literacy and young people. The presentation is in relation to a research that explored adolescents’ evaluation of the credibility of Instagram posts in Finland. For this, ten authentic Instagram posts were selected representing two themes: eating meat and digital healthy. Both themes are contradictory and of adolescents’ interest. In addition, the posts represented different image types (infographic, image of a person, meme, and promotion image) and different author types (organization, expert, celebrity, blogger, and pseudonym). A think-aloud methodology was used to investigate participants' (N = 15) evaluation practices when they explored the posts. Participants were instructed to verbalize all their thoughts simultaneously when they watched, read, and evaluated the posts. Think aloud-brought available adolescents’ concurrent thoughts when they evaluated multimodal Information. In the analysis, they used episodes as units of analysis. Episodes were used to capture the elements of the posts that adolescents paid attention to during credibility evaluation. Episodes were classified into five categories: 1) exploring an image of the post, 2) exploring a caption, 3) exploring a bio/profile, 4) final credibility judgment, and 5) other. In order to examine adolescents’ evaluation practices, they identified and categorized episodes that included an evaluative talk and analysed different evaluative "tracks”.
| 61'''*''' || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash04_23 | Flash 4]] || Soledad Magnone || Tampere University, CRITICAL project || Academia || || || || || || || || || The session would be a presentation by Reijo Kupiainen (cc'd) from CRITICAL group at Tampere University, specialised on media, information and digital literacy and young people. The presentation is in relation to a research that explored adolescents’ evaluation of the credibility of Instagram posts in Finland. For this, ten authentic Instagram posts were selected representing two themes: eating meat and digital healthy. Both themes are contradictory and of adolescents’ interest. In addition, the posts represented different image types (infographic, image of a person, meme, and promotion image) and different author types (organization, expert, celebrity, blogger, and pseudonym). A think-aloud methodology was used to investigate participants' (N = 15) evaluation practices when they explored the posts. Participants were instructed to verbalize all their thoughts simultaneously when they watched, read, and evaluated the posts. Think aloud-brought available adolescents’ concurrent thoughts when they evaluated multimodal Information. In the analysis, they used episodes as units of analysis. Episodes were used to capture the elements of the posts that adolescents paid attention to during credibility evaluation. Episodes were classified into five categories: 1) exploring an image of the post, 2) exploring a caption, 3) exploring a bio/profile, 4) final credibility judgment, and 5) other. In order to examine adolescents’ evaluation practices, they identified and categorized episodes that included an evaluative talk and analysed different evaluative "tracks”.

Latest revision as of 16:24, 19 May 2023

During the call for issues for EuroDIG we received 60 submissions in the period from 12 September till 31 December 2022. You can see the breakdown of proposals here and download the list of proposals as of 31 December 2022, 24:00 CET as pdf file. The list below is a rolling document where proposals will be added during the review period. Proposals marked with an asterisk * have been added after 31 Dec. 2022.

Categories are coloured as follows: (up to three categories per proposal could be selected)

 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 the head of the column. To restore the original sorting, just reload the page.