List of proposals for EuroDIG 2022
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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.
| ID | assigned to (Will be done after the planning meeting.) | Submitted by | Affiliation | Stakeholder Group | Suggested issue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 1 | Amali De Silva - Mitchell | Futurist | Other | Misinformation is leading citizens to not take vaccines, follow pratices that have not been recommended, lead to decision making with poor quality data and misinformation. Literacy or good judgement without bias is critical for all. How could we develop a simple framework or guideline of ethics to be put in place that can be followed when we read something online or a robot reads online? Re-iteration of misinformation is a serious issue(it is compounding the issue) that some item is so misrepresented, it can gain absolute popularity that it can lead to formation as law and also to serious defamation and mis-representation. This area of re-enforcement of mis-information for online news must be discussed. It is now not just misinformation or fake news but is gaining of popularism that makes citizens Trust it due to constant re-enforcement or brain washing which is worrying... If humans trust misinformatuon what will it do for algorithms and hence AI and our own lives beyond? AI must develop an ethical framework for investigating mis-information, this is Critical. |
| 2 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 1 | Agnes Hajdu Barat | Association of Hungarian Librarians | Civil society | Librarians are the keypoint of literacy and acces. Competencies are very crucial from this aspect. |
| 3 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1 | Xhoana SHEHU | ETNO | Private sector | 1. ACCESS AND LITERACYA greener and digital Europe: Digital technology and infrastructure have a critical role to play to accelerate the recovery and shape the digital transformation of Europe’s society and economy. Thus, the European Commission provided strategic funding to answer the twin challenges of today: achieving a more digital and a greener economy and society. How will these funding foster connectivity and demand-side aspects, including skills and the digitisation of the public sector? How will this support the achievement of the 2030 Digital Compass targets? |
| 4 | Focus Area 1 / WS 3 | Filipe Batista | ANACOM | Government | International Connectivity in the context European data-Gateway Platforms and the Global Gateways “The Digital Decade: The European Way for the Digital” recognizes connectivity as a pillar for the required digital transformation. Connectivity should be a fundamental building block in EU efforts, highlighting the importance of connecting Europe to the rest of the world. The Digital Decade is complemented by The European Data-Gateway Ministerial Declaration that was adopted at the initiative of the Portuguese presidency. The Declaration calls for Increased attention to international connectivity through submarine cables and other technologies. Both the Digital Decade and the Ministerial Declaration are key steps towards establishing a comprehensive digital connectivity strategy not just between the EU Members, but also to other regions across the Globe. This strategy is crucial to turn the EU into world-class data hub and its digital products competitive worldwide. This is where the Global Gateways steps in. Launched on December 1, 2021, Global Gateway is the new European Strategy to boost smart, clean and secure links in digital, energy and transport . It aims to mobilise up to €300 billion in investments between 2021 and 2027. The Eurodig should discuss the importance of International connectivity for the EU competitiveness in the digital world and for building a human-centric digital transformation |
| 5 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 1 | Valensiya Dresvyannikova | International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions | Civil society | Digital wellbeing has been highlighted as an important consideration for Europe’s digital transformation and digital education – necessitating, inter alia, measures towards increased awareness around cyber safety and media literacy, particularly for students and learners. What lessons can be drawn from stakeholders’ experiences with digital wellbeing initiatives during the pandemic – and how can informal and semi-formal learning opportunities complement existing initiatives in formal educational settings? |
| 6 | 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. |
| 7 | 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. |
| 8 | 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. |
| 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 ? |
| 10 | currently open | Wout de Natris | IGF DC-Internet Standards, Security and Safety | Other | How to close the gap between the theory of Internet security and the daily insecurity by design? Many stakeholders discuss the need for security but somehow the translation into action often gets lost. The deployment of, existing, security related Internet standards and ICT best practices involves many, very different stakeholders, of which many have no knowledge of the topic, let alone the technical knowhow and understanding. How to involve them into the debate? Do we reach them at all? What are individual roles of stakeholders? The relevance for Europe is part of a global solution, but the more secure by design Internet services, products and devices (in/coming into Europe) are, the more secure and safe European end users, industry, institutions and individuals alike, are. |
| 11 | currently open | André Melancia | Technical Community | Technical community | Post-pandemic new world: Two years since the start of the pandemic (and one year since the last EuroDIG discussion on this subject), how have things changed? Technology (bigger usage in Internet/Cloud services, trust in such services and providers, etc.), new labour methods (including remote work), legal changes, fundamental changes to society, etc. What has improved our lives? What has made them worse? How can the Internet stakeholders fix the latter and improve the former? (so many questions!) |
| 12 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2 Focus Area 2 / WS 2 |
Riccardo Nanni | University of Bologna | Academia | 5G: standardisation is ongoing and rollout is stepping up. Despite a change in US leadership, the US-China competition has not faded. Where do EU stakeholders position themselves? |
| 13 | 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? |
| 14 | 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. |
| 15 | 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. |
| 16 | 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 |
| 17 | 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. |
| 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? |
| 19 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1 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. |
| 20 | 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. |
| 21 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 3 Focus Area 3 / WS 7 |
Klaus Stoll | Internet Integrity Task Force, IITF | Civil society | Digital Identity. Despite the critical role that digital identity plays, it is a widely misunderstood concept. We propose to take a holistic approach toward the topic through the single unifying lens of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: a) Definition. An alphabet soup of terms used in digital identity in different technical standards/protocols and governance frameworks. Based on the current best thinking there is a need to agree on a working definition of digital identity. b) Technical Implementation. We need to look number of specific digital identity technical implementations and the strengths and weaknesses of each, and on how closely it aligned to the relevant articles in the UDHR and the OHCHR. c) Emerging Trust Frameworks. We need to look at some of the emerging trust frameworks that have been proposed to implement digital identity and identify points of convergence and divergence. d) Business Models. We need look at the various business models for digital identity solutions (private/public/hybrid), and how cultural considerations may have acted as a barrier to implementation in some countries. As the EU moves forward with proposed revisions to eIDAS regulations, it is importance for both the public and private sector to have an open dialog about digital identity. If the EU is successful, the revised eIDAS regulations can become the gold stands in digital identity. |
| 22 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1 | Minda Moreira | Internet Rights and Principles Coalition | Civil society | How is Europe leading the way to a rights-based and environmentally sustainable digital transformation worldwide? As the climate crisis deepens in a world that fails to see the urgency of change, is Europe doing enough to achieve a digital transformation that promotes and upholds the Sustainable Development Goals and contributes to sustainable futures past 2050? What concrete policy actions are still needed to address current challenges and to fully achieve these goals? How can the EuroDIG community better support the green digital transformation? |
| 23 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2 | Samo Grasic | Luleå University of Technology | Academia | Internet’s impact on today’s critical infrastructures Seamless proliferation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices into vital municipal services such as water supply, energy distribution, food supply, heating, etc. might pose a risk to EU citizens as they often comprise part of critical infrastructures. The following theme addresses four areas: 1) centralized Internet services are vulnerable, both to local and global Internet disruptions. This problem could be mitigated by forcing/encouraging the design of distributed and resilient ICT architectures. 2) potential lack of security of IoT devices that are integrated into critical infrastructures renders these infrastructures vulnerable to hacks. 3) issues regarding the interests of national, and global actors, public and private stakeholders as well as individual interests, as citizens and/or consumers open questions related to data/information ownerships, access and national integrities. What are the responsibilities of private actors that sell these devices/services that are integrated into public infrastructures? 4) are there any hidden dependencies on Internet within national contingency services? For instance, how would a local/global Internet blackout affect the work of firefighters, police and military? This is a call for EU policy makers to investigate the ICT related risks of critical infrastructures. Should EU mandate an increased/validated ICT security, producer responsibilities, open protocols,... |
| 24 | currently open | Samo Grasic | Luleå University of Technology | Academia | Agricultural innovations and IoTAn increasing number of innovations in the agricultural sector relies on Internet infrastructures. Together with recent proliferation of IoT, devices such as soil sensors, weather stations and tractors improve efficiency in current farming practices.While modern ICTs solve many problems, they also create new ones. This theme relates to the IoT technology challenges in the agricultural sector. Participating in the EIP Agri EU program between 2017 and 2020, I propose the following topics: – Proprietary/closed standards and platforms: Many IoT sensors and devices that are deployed use closed and proprietary platforms to access data. This is the case, also for machines, seeds and fertilizers, which bonds farmers to a certain brand/platform. This, in turn could affect the competitiveness of EU’s agricultural sector and also prevent innovations as the collected data cannot be cross-shared with other products and services. – Data ownership: Big IoT agricultural players are able to collect and process critical farming data. Saying this, who owns the farmers’ data? Do the farmers have the chance to decide how data is stored and used? – Mobile Internet Connectivity in rural areas: As today’s farming machinery assumes access to fast mobile Internet, farming in rural areas can be negatively affected by slow/disrupted mobile Internet connectivity or lack thereof. This, in turn can prevent rural farmers from using the latest farming technologies. |
| 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. |
| 26 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2 Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2 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? |
| 27 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2 | James Crabbe | Wolfson College, Oxford University | Academia | How to involve China and Chinese delegates in the overall Governance ecosystem. |
| 28 | 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. |
| 29 | 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. |
| 30 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2 | Stephanie Teeuwen | 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. |
| 31 | 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/ |
| 32 | 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. |
| 33 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2 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? |
| 34 | 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? |
| 35 | 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. |
| 36 | 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. |
| 37 | currently open | Weronika Koralewska | Save our Seeds | Civil society | I think one of the most important and overlooked issue in the Internet Governance community currently is the issue of human rights of people and farmers when it comes to how the ‘big tech’ moves into food and farming, threatening their livelihood and food security. I believe we could learn from the USA’s experience, not to repeat similar mistakes they did in this regard (https://grain.org/en/article/6595-digital-control-how-big-tech-moves-into-food-and-farming-and-what-it-means). |
| 38 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 2 Focus Area 1 / WS 3 |
Vlad Ivanets | YouthDIG, Youth Board of CCTLD.RU | Civil society | The sovereignization of the Internet in Eastern Europe. What lies behind the «independence» and «autonomy» of nationalized (or becoming more nationalised) segments of the Internet? What can be the implications of this process for the global community. Is it really possible to achieve full independence in the global world (and for whom can such a goal be beneficial)? |
| 39 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1 | Desara Dushi | VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL | Academia | AI is developing rapidly, with many platforms claiming to assist in decision-making and/or GDPR compliance. These platforms pose many risks to human rights and privacy. With the new AI proposal, a panel on the human rights risk assessment and how will this proposal impact such platforms would be very interesting in a multistakeholder setting like EuroDIG. |
| 40 | 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 |
| 41 | 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. |
| 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 ? |
| 43 | 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. |
| 44 | 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? |
| 45 | currently open | Delfi Ramirez Ruiz | ISOC UK | Private sector | Move to thorium-based industrialisation and production, applying extensive investment in the development of sustainable and cost-effective HTRs and MSRs, thus providing a diversification option for nuclear fuel supply. Move and evolve towards this nuclear fuel supply and induction economy in the next 10 years. |
| 46 | currently open | Ayden Férdeline | Independent | Civil society | The web3 revolution puts the Internet at a crossroads. We have an opportunity to build an internet free from platform exploitation: where people have ownership and control over their own data, where communities can architect infrastructures and governance systems based on their values, where arbitrary borders can’t impinge economic freedom. But this future is far from guaranteed. Stories about vapourware and scams aren’t just a branding problem — they’re a significant reality. Some venture capitalists see crypto as a means to create new forms of digital scarcity, to extend their surveillance or commodify our relationships, and to claim the spoils for themselves. Creating a better web (and a better future!) begins with building bridges with the world today: bringing together engineers and policymakers to imagine, advocate for, and create better human-technological futures. |
| 47 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1 | Vittorio Bertola | Open-Xchange AG | Private sector | The current draft of the Digital Markets Act is going to introduce obligations for the gatekeeping Internet platforms that need technical and practical specification. Concepts like mandatory interoperability, free choice of the providers of ancillary services, data portability, prohibition of default self-preferencing for apps in mobile OSes, require the identification or even the creation of technical standards, user interface guidelines and standard terms of service between multiple Internet service and software providers. How should this implementation process work? How do we prevent gatekeepers from deploying solutions that only defend their dominance and do not practically meet the policy objectives? How do we ensure that these choices are made in the best interest of the European citizens and cannot be biased by the interest of any specific company? How do we avoid technical choices that can disrupt the architecture of the Internet or create unintended consequences? How do we involve all relevant stakeholders on a fair basis? |
| 48 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1 | Pierpaolo Marchese | Independent Consultant | Technical community | 5G – With the growing diffusion of the Standalone architecture, 5G is entering a new wave of deployment in private and public networks. However, how will 5G contribute to the overall objectives of the Agenda 2030 and, more particularly, to the energetic sustainability of those networks? |
| 49 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1 | Babatunde Onabajo | ChurchMapped Limited | Private sector | In a preliminary finding by the European Commission, Amazon was found to be abusing EU antitrust rules and distorting online retail markets by using information that is not public about the sellers that sell on its platform to the benefit of Amazon’s own business which directly competes with those sellers. Put more clearly, when a seller sells on the Amazon platform, Amazon can gauge – with the help of statistics and machine learning – which items are in high demand. Amazon can then decide to sell said items at a lower price and price out competitors. This issue has caused some degree of conversation among many in the technology community, and it confronts us with the question of the degree to which platforms should be able to use information extracted from its platform to compete with those who are selling on the platform. Is this a form of antitrust or not? Should it be allowed, regulated or banned? This is what this issue hopes to discuss. |
| 50 | currently open | Shanna Soh | Royal Academy of Art, The Hague (NL) | Academia | In recent years, fashion has increasingly moved towards the digital realm. For example, the creation of clothing for virtual avatars in games and/or the metaverse or unique (NFT) pieces based on blockchain technology. With its long history in fashion, what do these new developments mean for the contemporary European fashion industry and -education? What kind of skills and professionals are needed to be able to stay competitive in this dynamic fast-paced environment? |
| 51 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1 | Julia Trzcińska | Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Alliance e.V. | Civil society | How to make a sustainable digital economy reality? What are existing approaches, projects, and initiatives? How IG is contributing towards building sustainable digital ecosystems? What layers are important and what actions are needed? |
| 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. |
| 53 | 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. |
| 54 | currently open | Jutta Croll | Stiftung Digitale Chancen | Civil society | Digitalisation in rural areas, lessons learned during the pandemic |
| 55 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 1 | Meri Baghdasaryan | Electronic Frontier Foundation | Civil society | Digital Services Act is quickly making its way into being adopted, offering a new framework for content moderation and transparency obligations. Therefore, it is important to discuss the current state of affairs on content moderation, intermediary liability and transparency obligations. |
| 56 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 1 | Giovanni De Gregorio | University of Oxford | Academia | In the last years, social media have provided platforms to exercise rights and freedoms online. Within these digital spaces, social media govern the flow of information online by moderating online content. Online platforms are free to decide how to show and organise online content according to predictive analysis based on the processing of users’ data. Despite the fundamental role of social media in shaping rights and freedoms, the information provided by these companies about content moderation is opaque or lawless. The lack of transparency and safeguards in content moderation calls into question the role of the Facebook Oversight Board. This body has already reviewed some of the most important cases of content removal addressed by Facebook, thus, making Facebook’s decision-making on content moderation more accountable and transparent. Nonetheless, such an alternative system raises concerns in terms of legitimacy, impartiality, and accountability. These cases do not only promise more responsibility and accountability of Facebook’s governance of online speech, but they also showcase private actors’ power to autonomously enforce community guidelines, while seeking legitimacy from an (independent) oversight board. |
| 57 | Pre Event 9 | Valensiya Dresvyannikova | International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions | Civil society | Online multilingualism and local content availability remain an important target, both in Europe and around the world. In Europe, this is being addressed by a range of initiatives and stakeholders, from language technology solutions to public service media and beyond. As a parallel and complement to these initiatives, what good practices and lessons can be learned from bottom-up approaches that focus on engaging communities in local content creation? |
| 58 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 3 | Vlad Ivanets | YouthDIG / Youth Board of CCTLD | Civil society | The battle between national regulators and technology giants. Where is the limit of pressure on the big-tech companies, and where is the limit of freedom for large corporations? How to force companies to cooperate with local governments without censoring or restricting their activities? What forms of responsibility can become optimal in the process of working out agreements? |
| 59 | Focus Area 4 / Subtopic 1 | Nertil Berdufi | Beder University College | Academia | What will be the impact of the new Digital Services Act in platform regulation, regarding transparency, disinformation and illegal content? |
| 60 | currently open | Maia Simonishvili | The National Parliamentary Library of Georgia | Government | Media and Content in the context of health rights including innovations and digital medicine are other topics, which is deeply connected to well being of citizens. Many of them are not familiar with the digital medicine possibilities and it was a very needed knowledge during the pandemic. Digital medicine includes many innovations, which should be accessible and known by Youth and underprivileged citizens. It would make prevention easier and understandable on time. |
| 61 | currently open | Allan Mulenga | Zambia police service | Government | I am interested to conduct a research online gender based violence especially to the physically challenged people. The physically challenged people are vulnerable online throgh alot of cyber crime issues like the cyber stalking, phishing. In this regard I need coperation, collaboration in issues of cybercrime awareness programe, issues of data privace and internet governace. One issue that is critical to handle issues of gender based violence to the physically challenged people. How do we help ? The blind, lame and deaf are the one affected. Do they offer funds for me to conduct sentization programe? What is the procedure? Other issues security and privacy, data privacy and integr. |
| 62 | currently open | Josef Noll | University of Oslo/Department of Technology Systems | Academia | I’d like to extend towards the terms of Cybersecurity to Societal Security. Digital Transformation has opened for a lot of threats, including lack of trust, hate speech, fake news – and especially the economic dimension of transferring income to the global IT companies, and making it harder for SMEs to find their way to the market. Thus, the topic of Societal Security is how to increase mechanisms for trust and confidence for every single member of the society – and especially the measures we can take to reach the goals. |
| 63 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2 Focus Area 2 / WS 2 |
Paul Vixie | SIE Europe U.G. | Technical community | Newer IETF standards such as QUIC and DOH seek to disintermediate all on-path actors in the name of individual privacy and motivated by the Snowden disclosures of 2013. On-path actors to be disintermediated include not only nation-state security apparatus and ISP data mining but also corporate firewalls and family Internet filters. By making all on-path actors blind to metadata such as DNS responses and TCP/IP startups, the only actors with insight will be the endpoints, who are most often surveillance capitalists at the server or smartphone endpoints. It will no longer be possible for system and network administrators, including parents, to implement behavioural security policies or detect malicious traffic flows or intruders. This is a matter of utmost importance to private network security as well as individual privacy and data sovereignty. |
| 64 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 3 | Giorgi Jokhadze | Council of Europe, Cybercrime Programme Office | Intergovernmental organisation | New tools for enhancing international cooperation on cybercrime and e-evidence: 2022 is shaping up to be the year in which cybercrime regulations will be taken to the next level by the Second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and the disclosure of electronic evidence. This new instrument, to be opened for signature in May 2022, is a “step forward in technological capacity and co-operation between governments and with service providers. It will extend the rule of law further into cyberspace, protect internet users, and help provide justice for those who become victims of crime”. However, the need for more efficient and more expedient cooperation in cybercrime investigations and cross-border handling of electronic evidence, compliant with the rule of law and human rights safeguards, is larger than the text of a treaty, reflecting exponential increase of cross-border online threats and crime in recent years. |
| 65 | 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. |
| 66 | 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. |
| 67 | Focus Area 2 / Subtopic 2 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. |
| 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. |
| 69 | 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? |
| 70 | 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. |
| 71 | 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. |
| 72 | 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? |
| 73 | Focus Area 2 / WS 1 | Tobias Spenger | Wir die Kinderfreunde | Government | Looking for new ways to save energy and develop strategies to keep energy usage efficient and sustainable |
| 74 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 1 | André Melancia | Technical community | Technical community | A.I. Armageddon: How we trust Artificial Intelligence for our everyday lives and services, and how it has gone terribly wrong in the last year (or so). From racist-taught bots, wrong face recognition leading to false imprisonment, autonomous vehicles causing deaths, a certain social network censoring millions of legitimate posts while boosting extreme-right wing, anti-vaxxer and covid-denier posts, thousands of A.I. fake profiles sharing false information... A.I. has caused hundreds of issues worldwide. (Analysis on legal and responsibility, technical reasoning for failures, motivation behind deliberate wrongful usages, etc.) |
| 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? |
| 76 | Focus Area 3 / Subtopic 2 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. |
| 77 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 1 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? |
| 78 | Focus Area 3 / WS 8 | Boštjan Grašič | MEIS d.o.o., Slovenia | Private sector | Regular use of DTN in terrestrial environments There will always be certain terrestrial environments where the use of legacy internet will not be feasible or possible due to natural constraints or environmental protection. Such an example are the underground caves and reindeer husbandry. DTN technology is an excellent solution for such environments and connecting them with the legacy internet. Within the framework of various projects, several implementations of DTN have been developed for use in space and on earth, but they are primarily adapted to the environments for which they were developed. Using DTN implementations in different environments than those for which they were developed is a challenge for the future and provides possibility for further development. Such transfer and usage are necessary to detect deeper errors in algorithms. An additional challenge is the interconnection of different DTN implementations, as this is a unique encouragement for standardization in DTN networks. The ideal environment for testing, transferring and connecting DTN implementations are different terrestrial environments because they are close at hand and they contain a whole range of different constraints that occur to the natural environment compared to a simple laboratory environment. The experience gained in such use and development of DTN implementation will be presented in the case of the exchange of information between two terrestrial DTN networks. |
| 79 | Focus Area 3 / WS 8 | Roberto Gaetano | EURALO | Civil society | There were several issues related to Delay-Tolerant Networks (DTN) that we did not have time to discuss at EuroDIG 2021: given the interest shown to the topic, it could be good to address them this year. The issue of spectrum was raised for applications on Earth, but further discussion after the conference showed that we have the same problem in space, for Inter-Planetary Communication. About the Inter-Planetary Internet, it would be good to hear from the European Space Agency (ESA) about their experience and plans. Last but not least, the question arises whether some processes are needed to make sure that the development and deployment of this extension of the “regular” internet are governed in the interest of all stakeholders. |
Proposals submitted during proposal review phase / Planning Meeting / programme review phase
| ID | assigned to | Submitted by | Affiliation | Stakeholder Group | Suggested issue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | currently open | Miguel Perez Subias | Spanish Internet Users Association | Civil society | Data Cooperatives a way to give citizens more power over their data ABSTRACT: To address the power imbalance between data producers and corporations that profit from our data, we propose creating data cooperatives to act as fiduciary intermediaries on the EU Single data Space. We are working on this model that we have circulated with legislators and policymakers in the EU. Data cooperatives are organizations that collect data from its members, process and monetize the pooled data, and compensate the members for their individual contributions. These cooperatives establish an ecosystem of trust among its members and are attractive to consumers for three basic reasons: Control. By design, the members of a data cooperative have control over the quality as well as the quantity of data they share with the cooperative. Bargaining power. Personal data of an individual by itself does not have much value. By aggregating members’ data, a cooperative can command a higher price from data buyers. Compensation. For sharing their data, members usually receive monetary compensation as opposed to in-kind services. The larger the size of a cooperative, the higher its bargaining power is, and leads to higher compensation for its members. For a set of accountable and responsible intermediary institutions to exist, people in power will first have to understand and agree that cooperative data ownership is appropriate and beneficial. We have also have to jump multiple technological, economic, regulatory, and social hurdles. We need reliable and secure ways to track the source of data as it is transferred and stored as well as privacy-preserving machine learning methods for pooling data and unlocking insights from it. We’ll also need regulations regarding privacy, data reuse and deletion, data interoperability, and portability. And if some data cooperatives hope to be compensated for data that companies now use for free, we will need to deal with pricing questions and establish ways for data intermediaries to obtain and distribute that compensation. And most important, there is a need to establish trust in these intermediaries as fiduciaries, which will require the implementation of meaningful and accountable democratic decision-making processes. Data cooperatives are emerging to empower consumers amidst a fast-changing data governance landscape, we need to setup of communities and organizations to build on top of the assets we have, and also allow many more people to have a voice in the data economy ecosystem. |
| 81 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2 | Andrea Beccalli | icann.org | Technical community | DNS4EU, Quad 9 and the Emerging Clash Between Technical Operators and Regulation. Does the current generation of policymakers and regulators truly understand how the Domain Name System (DNS) – the fundamental system for global Internet navigation – works? Or are they grasping at the wrong tools to bring “a better Internet” to citizens? Two case studies illustrate potential gaps in understanding:
|
| 82 | Focus Area 1 / Subtopic 2 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:
Joint Proposal by ICANN, ISOC, RIPE NCC and CENTR |
| 83 | 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 |
| 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. |
| 85 | currently open | Alève Mine | Zurich AR/VR Meetup | Technical community | The significance of captives/insurance for our system |
| 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 |
| 87 | 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. |
| 88 | 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. |