跳到主要內容

IGF 2017 highlights need for greater dialogue



Recently I participated remotely in my first Internet Governance Forum — IGF 2017 — which was held at the United Nations Office in Geneva, Switzerland from 18 to 21 December.

From the comfort of our offices and homes, I (along with 1,660 other remote participants) was able to listen to and participate in a range of multistakeholder discussions surrounding emerging technologies and Internet governance-related issues on the theme of Shape Your Digital Future!

Gaps between technical communities and policy makers

Dialogue is an important component of the multistakeholder model — multiple parties come together to contextualize a problem and resolve it through information exchange. That said, it is difficult for different groups to let go of preconceptions.

In some sessions, there were participants that were solely of the opinion that policy is the first priority, and that technical problems can’t be stated in the policy or explained to people.

These people need to think widely; they also need to have the ability to translate what people want in policies and adjust them accordingly. That said, it is difficult to translate opinions from technical communities to policy makers, which only strengthens the need for clear communication and dialogue.

Gaps between developed and developing economies

The Internet has become a commonplace utility for many. In my home, Taiwan, Internet penetration is among the highest and most affordable in the world. However, for many people the Internet is still a luxury.

I found from participating at the IGF that this gap, between developed and developing economies, brings with it varying priorities:
  • Developed economies talked about trust, cybersecurity, governance and policies, surveillance, ethical issues, and emerging technologies such as the Internet of Things and Blockchain.
  • Developing economies talked about infrastructure, rights to access the Internet, affordable Internet, quality education, as well as human rights and safety issues.
Needless to say, the discussion about the Internet has evolved from the haves and have-nots, which is why such multistakeholder mechanisms like the IGF are important for planning for the future development of the Internet. Different stakeholders sit together to discuss and find the solution, and people can learn from each other and consider other people’s perspectives, needs and experiences.

Language may be the largest barrier

More than 2,000 participants from 142 economies, representing all stakeholder groups and regions, attended IGF 2017 in person.

The IGF provides translation services to allow attendees — in person and remotely — to understand speakers so long as they speak in any of the six UN official languages: English, Chinese, French, Arabic, Spanish and Russian — most sessions were in English.

Although this allows a large majority of people to easily share and understand each other’s views, it does impact the experience of those whom such language is a second or third language, particularly those from Asia Pacific economies. Some topics are difficult enough to explain in your own language let alone trying to interpret their meaning for another language.

Obviously, it would be great to get more people adding to the dialogue in their native language, but how can we make it more convenient?

Besides inclusion of language, respect for religion, culture and customs is also important to encourage people to share their opinions.

I learned how to work on the Internet

IGF 2017 wasn’t all about listening to discussions. I was able to participate in working groups, including the NRIs working group. It was a great experience to collaborate with people (whom I’ve never met in different economies and time zones) on working documents, and discuss issues on mailing lists and in online meetings.


Wish for more people to join IGF

It is difficult for young people in Asian economies, particularly students, to sit with government officials and talk about Internet or government policies — it can be overwhelming and they may feel they do not have enough experience to share.

At the closing plenary, Jianne Soriano said, “Being young is not a disadvantage, it is a strength.” It’s great that the IGF understands the need to include the opinions and ideas of younger people in discussions that are ultimately shaping their future.

This message is something that I’m looking forward to taking back to and implementing at the Taiwan IGF, and to hopefully encourage more younger participants to IGF 2018.


This article is published on APNIC Blog. Robert Mitchell, the editor has edited it.

留言

這個網誌中的熱門文章

讀百年孤寂的一些感想

馬奎斯的小說,買回家的那天晚上就讀的欲罷不能。第一次閱畢,只能感受到文字所帶給我的感受,當我讀第二次、第三次後,總在生活裡的某些情境下憶起書中的情節與書中人物的苦悶。這場空虛夢幻開始於愛情與理想-老邦迪亞帶著易家蘭與朋友們離開家鄉,開創了馬康多這個奇幻的城市;也結束於愛情與理想-倭良諾與小亞瑪蘭塔的亂倫生下了預言中帶著豬尾巴的嬰兒,之後倭良諾翻譯完吉卜賽人的手稿,整個馬康多毀滅。這個家族的女性:易家蘭的堅毅性格與匹達黛的沉默付出;叫亞瑪蘭塔的女孩總是勇敢追求愛情而心態扭曲;這個家族的男人一生都在追求著自己生命中的目標,亞克迪奧的狂妄無羈,先是追求情欲,他的兒子追求名利;老邦迪亞追求著心中的理想(新的生活、發明);小邦迪亞追求政治上的勝利與心靈的平靜、席甘多與席根鐸兄弟兩人,哥哥追求的是欲望的滿足,弟弟追求的是心靈上的滿足與事實的存在;卡碧娥追求的「當女王」的夢想,而這個家族又與吉卜賽人有著密不可分的關係。當我啃食著書中文字時,馬奎斯的文字也在我的腦海裡建立著一幅又一幅的圖像:從有著鳥鳴鐘與銀杏葉的美麗城市、莉比卡張著大眼驚恐的坐在小椅上吮著手指的灰藍色畫面,;卡碧娥處於高地的城市除了虛偽的白色聖潔外還有一種孤獨的藍色;小邦迪亞與莫氏柯蒂近乎於天真的愛情與最後政治鬥爭的失敗而封閉是一種苦悶摻著靛藍色的灰;美女瑞米迪娥的升天是白色與藍色的純潔,對比著卡碧娥愚昧的世俗、席根多與席甘鐸在死亡前的面容與棺木被放反了墓穴、美美為了愛情的放蕩、最後倭良諾讀完吉卜賽人留下手稿的那一陣風…所有的畫面總蒙上一層昏暗的黃色光,對我而,那是一種孤單與遺忘。當我身在雨下個不停又溼冷的淡水時,腦海裡閃過的是書中四年多的雨季;當妖精國王講到失眠時,我腦海裡浮現的是馬康多的集體失眠;當夏日一陣風拂過,閃過的是倭良諾最後發現整個邦迪亞家族是一場夢幻的空虛與毀滅。而黃昏的夕陽,總讓我想起倭良諾與小亞瑪蘭塔放肆的愛情。我們總在生命中追求著自己的理想,如書中的每個角色:追求愛情、追求名利、追求所謂的「真實」,總在生命的最後一刻才發現自己的一生甚至所看到的一切是一個虛幻的畫面,就像馬康多,這個城市從未存在過,對書中的人而言,馬康多是存在著的,但對我們而言馬康多是虛構的、建構在文字與腦海裡的。我所看到的世界是我腦海裡建構出來的世界,這個城市是我心中的馬康多,眼裡所見的是腦中點線面建構出來的空間,而我的心情就…

【隨手記】不歡迎匿名回應者

致 小白先生/女士,你的編號是47,727,就是喜歡當藏鏡人是吧?只要是匿名回應,管你留了什麼好的、壞的、非商業性、公益活動,我就是不放出來。要說什麼好話什麼義正言辭,回你自己家說去,在我這裡,少用匿名在這裡長篇大論,具名回應是種禮貌,你對我沒禮貌,我何必把你說的話放在自家的部落格裡?柯南說:「兇手是會回去案發現場檢視自己成果的。」這是貓玲玲提醒我的,哈哈哈。Technorati Tags:

智慧城市不是只有得獎、入圍而已及參觀智慧城市展感想

之前參與了第8次的火箭聊天室,講者Roy Lin提到了:「當大家在提到『智慧城市』四個字時,想到的多半是:智慧停車、智慧燈柱、智慧巴士...等項目,多是以科技發展的角度,卻沒有自設計師的立場出發,也沒有人想過是要以『智慧』的方式來處理城市生活裡所面臨的各種問題。」不斷反思這段話。

智慧城市不止是在談解決方案,更在談系統整合
打造智慧城市並不是談如何拿到ICF(Intelligent Community Forum)的智慧城市評比,更不是拿裡面的評量標準拿來當作是施政的KPI,若要讓居住於其中的市民有感,應該要先找出都市中需要被解決的問題,例如利用政府開放資料找出都市中的閒置空間,實際去探訪這些閒置空間的規劃是被作為停車場、公園或乾脆荒廢的一塊地,又或是透過資料視覺化來顯示城市的脈動,藉此可以在未來進行商圈規劃或是都市更新發展等。有些國家如新加坡便是與日本合作智慧節能系統,鼓勵國內的新創研發,投資海外的創新研發,並應用在國家發展中,以期讓人民的生活更便利。