Markdown from IGF pages

2026-09-18 12:50:59 +02:00
commit 26db01c712
165 changed files with 137619 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #114 Why Infrastructure & Content Moderation Shouldn't Mix
+
+## Description
+
+We often associate 'content moderation' with posts being blocked or taken down by social media companies. However, they are not the only ones playing a role in content governance: infrastructure providers at lower levels of the internet 'stack' also act as gatekeepers for content - whether through their internal decision making processes or in compliance with requests from various actors. Particularly when it comes to the Domain Name System (DNS), the 'address book' of the internet, such actions can have a chilling effect on freedom of expression online.
+
+Stakeholders are ordering domain suspensions as a solution to block access to a wide range of content, ranging from copyright infringement to independent media coverage. Concurrently, AI is accelerating the scale and scope of abuse via the DNS. The problem is that the only action these operators can take is inherently broad: to target content on a particular webpage, they must block all webpages using the same domain. This approach is like damming a river to catch a few fish. This is particularly worrying given that the relationship between domain suspension orders and freedom of expression is not broadly understood.
+
+With policymakers already debating new regulations to curb this abuse via the DNS, there is an urgent need for multistakeholder dialogue on the governance of this critical infrastructure. The session proposal also directly applies to the IGF 2026 theme as it speaks to governing digital infrastructure in the Age of Intelligence.
+
+The DNS was designed to enable access to information - not stifle it. We have a shared responsibility to ensure it stays that way. We therefore propose convening a cross-regional group of experts to introduce the topic to the IGF community, exchange perspectives and collaborate on potential solutions to balance safety and security needs with human rights safeguards.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. What is the role of governments versus that of domain operators when it comes to balancing freedom of expression and DNS abuse mitigation? What role can civil society play?
+B. How can regulatory policy aimed at DNS abuse mitigation integrate human rights protections and safeguards?
+C. What lessons from policy regulating other areas of the internet (such as platform or AI governance) could be applied to policy regulating the DNS?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+Participants will gain a more nuanced understanding of the invisible yet significant role that digital infrastructure plays in the availability and dissemination of information online, and specifically, with more technical expertise when it comes to the DNS. The session also involves collaboratively developing policy recommendations for regulating the use of infrastructure for the purposes of content moderation. Participants can then bring this new expertise and recommendations to their national and regional contexts. Given the trend of using the DNS for content moderation and censorship is a global one, the session will serve as a stepping-stone for building broader stakeholder capacity to engage in new and ongoing complex regulatory and technical discussions on the responsibility of infrastructure providers, government, and civil society when it comes to addressing abuse via the DNS while ensuring human rights safeguards remain intact.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 60
+**Format description:** Given the session will cover a complex technical topic, the panel format with a roundtable layout that allows for subject matter experts to first provide an introduction to the topic is best suited for our session aims. With this format, our speakers have the space to provide a comprehensive overview of what the DNS and how it works in an approachable manner before delving into key regulatory challenges and opportunities. Finally, given this is a topic that audience members may not be well-versed in prior to the session, this format facilitates an open dialogue that invites audience engagement through questions and interventions.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** ARTICLE 19 and DotAsia (.Asia) have extensive experience facilitating and organizing hybrid meetings, including the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF), the Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum (DRIF), and Global Gathering, among many other events. The hybrid IGF session will have an in-person moderator with a mixture of in-person and online speakers. The session will have a traditional A/V set up on-site, including Zoom participation and any IGF platform tools. The DotAsia team will support in-person with ARTICLE 19 supporting remotely to facilitate comments, questions and answers from the participants. Questions for discussion will be shared, along with findings from ARTICLE 19's DNS abuse case study, for participants' reaction and feedback.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Edmon Chung, 🔒DotAsia
+**Organizer 2:** Evin Erdogdu, DotAsia Organisation
+**Organizer 3:** Michaela Shapiro, ARTICLE 19
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Polina Malaja, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Christabel Mebaghandu, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 3:** Edmon Chung, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 4:** Michaela Shapiro, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Edmon Chung, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Michaela Shapiro, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Michaela Shapiro, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.1
+9.a
+9.c
+10.2
+10.3
+16.10
+16.3
+16.6
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #148 The Future of the Open Internet in an Interconnected World
+
+## Description
+
+The open Internet depends not only on rights and rules at the application layer, but also on the decentralised arrangements through which autonomous networks exchange traffic. Peering, transit, Internet Exchange Points (IXPs), Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) and caches shape reachability, resilience, competition, traffic localisation and the ability of networks of different sizes to participate. As governments consider how infrastructure investment and demand are evolving in response to AI, cloud services and video traffic, proposals involving network usage fees, mandatory bargaining, facilitated dispute resolution and new reporting obligations may have different effects across the interconnection ecosystem.
+This roundtable compares experiences from the European Union, Brazil, the Republic of Korea and African markets to examine what can be learned from the available evidence, how different policy approaches respond to concerns raised by stakeholders and what their possible technical, economic and governance implications may be. Rather than framing the issue as a binary dispute between telecommunications operators and digital service providers, the session will distinguish among three related questions: how infrastructure investment can be supported; how the economics and architecture of interconnection are evolving; and which governance principles can help sustain an open and globally interoperable Internet.
+The discussion will consider different approaches currently under debate, including mandatory payments, facilitated dispute resolution, and transparency or data-collection obligations. Speakers and participants will be invited to reflect on how these approaches could affect peering, transit, IXPs, CDN and cache deployment, smaller Internet service providers, infrastructure investment, competition and end-user choice. Through moderated discussion, audience questions and live polling, the session will seek to identify areas of agreement, points of uncertainty and questions requiring further evidence across different market and regional contexts.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A) What does the evidence from South Korea, the EU Digital Networks Act debate and Anatel’s proceedings reveal about current interconnection arrangements, stakeholder concerns and possible regulatory responses?
+B) How can governments address concerns about infrastructure investment without altering the governance principles that have historically sustained an open, globally interoperable Internet?
+C) How could network fees or other mandatory payment mechanisms adopted in major markets affect Internet development in other regions, including infrastructure deployment, competition, connectivity costs and user choice?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+A clearer comparative understanding of the experiences of the European Union, Brazil and the Republic of Korea, including what the available evidence suggests about Internet interconnection, infrastructure investment and the governance of the open Internet. A brief summary of the discussion and its main takeaways may be shared through the organisers’ and partner institutions’ communication channels.
+Identification of relevant considerations for assessing proposals that may affect Internet interconnection, including their possible implications for competition, infrastructure investment, Internet architecture, market participation and the preservation of an open and globally interoperable Internet. The session is intended to contribute perspectives and questions that may inform ongoing policy and regulatory discussions across jurisdictions.
+Stronger dialogue among policymakers, the technical community, civil society, academia and industry from different regions, creating opportunities for continued exchange on Internet interconnection and the governance of the open Internet within the IGF ecosystem and regional Internet governance processes.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** A roundtable format is best suited to this session because the questions under discussion do not have a single technical, economic or regulatory answer. Meaningful analysis requires direct exchange among participants representing different regions, sectors and institutional perspectives.
+
+The 90-minute duration allows the session to combine focused interventions with substantive discussion. The first part will establish the principal policy models and the available evidence regarding their impacts. The second will compare experiences from different jurisdictions and examine possible safeguards, alternatives and implementation risks. The remaining time will be dedicated to audience questions, scenario-based discussion and identification of areas of agreement and disagreement.
+
+The roundtable layout will reduce the separation between speakers and participants, encourage interaction throughout the session and allow the moderators to incorporate audience contributions into each thematic segment rather than limiting participation to a short question-and-answer period at the end.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will provide structured opportunities for both onsite and online participants to contribute. A single moderator will guide the discussion, manage the speaking order and periodically invite questions and comments submitted through the online platform.
+Remote participants will be encouraged to submit questions through the chat throughout the session. These questions will be grouped and introduced during the dedicated audience discussion and Q&A, alongside interventions from onsite participants. This format will help ensure that online contributions are considered without requiring separate moderation tracks.
+A brief live poll may be used at the beginning of the session to identify participants’ initial perspectives on the main policy questions. The results will serve as an entry point for the discussion and may be revisited during the closing reflections. The interactive elements will remain flexible so that sufficient time is preserved for substantive audience questions and exchanges among participants.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Thobias Moura, dig.ia
+**Organizer 2:** Amrita Choudhury, 🔒CCAOI
+**Organizer 3:** Milena Cramar Londero, Internet Society - Brazil Chapter
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Amrita Choudhury, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 2:** Lara Levet, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 3:** Phokeer Amreesh, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 4:** Thomas Lohninger, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Thobias Moura, Private Sector, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Milena Cramar Londero, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Milena Cramar Londero, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.1
+9.c
+16.7
+17.16
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #193 Co-creating an Inclusive AI-Enabled Internet
+
+## Description
+
+Artificial intelligence is reshaping how people access, create, share and participate in knowledge online, while influencing how decisions about the Internet’s future are made. Yet these changes are not experienced equally. Differences in access, digital and AI literacy, language representation, institutional capacity and participation shape who benefits from emerging technologies, who contributes to their development, and who is excluded from governance decisions.
+
+This interactive workshop explores how communities can move from being users of an AI-enabled Internet to becoming meaningful participants in shaping its future.
+
+Through a five-stage collaborative process: Understand → Map the Problem → Co-design a Response → Stress-test Governance Implications → Commit to Action, participants will work together to examine real-world AI and Internet governance challenges.
+
+Unlike a traditional panel, facilitators will provide prompts, tools and guidance, while participants lead the discussion and development of solutions. Small groups will identify affected communities and stakeholders, explore governance challenges, develop practical responses, test potential risks and unintended consequences, and define concrete next steps.
+
+The workshop will address issues including access, literacy, language, representation, accountability, transparency, rights and meaningful participation while considering diverse community contexts and capacities.
+
+Bringing together Kenyan, African and international perspectives, the session will encourage participation across stakeholder groups, regions, genders, professional backgrounds. The methodology supports meaningful participation by participants. Facilitators will guide the process but participants will contribute their experiences and expertise to create community-centred responses. The workshop will produce practical action ideas showing how multistakeholder approaches can translate AI governance discussions into locally relevant possibilities.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+1. How can communities participate meaningfully in shaping the governance of an AI-enabled Internet and the systems that affect their access to knowledge and participation?
+2. How can AI governance responses better address differences in access, digital literacy, language, representation and community capacity?
+3. What governance safeguards should stakeholders consider when designing and implementing community-centred responses to AI-related challenges?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+Participants will develop a practical understanding of how AI-related Internet governance challenges affect communities and stakeholders, and how inclusive, participatory approaches can address these challenges.
+Through the five-stage collaborative process, groups will identify a challenge, map affected communities and stakeholders, develop a community-centred response, assess governance risks and safeguards, and define a concrete action step.
+The workshop will generate participant-led outputs using the framework: Challenge → Response → Governance Consideration → Action
+These outputs will capture key insights, proposed responses and governance considerations, informing the session report and supporting continued collaboration after IGF 2026. Participants will leave with a practical approach for moving from identifying challenges to designing and testing possible solutions.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Classroom
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** The workshop is designed around collaborative problem-solving rather than expert presentations. A classroom format therefore provides the strongest opportunity for participants to contribute their experiences, perspectives and expertise in groups.
+Participants will work in diverse small groups through five connected stages:
+1. Understand
+2. Map the Problem
+3. Co-design a Response
+4. Stress-test the Governance Implications
+5. Commit to Action
+Facilitators will introduce each stage, provide guiding questions and support the groups, while participants generate the substantive analysis and proposed responses.
+The 90-minute format allows participants to move from understanding a concrete challenge to developing and testing a possible response, while leaving time for concise group pitches and joint reflection.
+The methodology builds on EduWiki Hub's participatory workshop experience, including its Wikimania 2026 workshop approach, where participants worked collaboratively on real-world challenges and developed and presented practical responses.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The workshop will be designed as a genuinely hybrid activity, with onsite and online participants contributing equally rather than remote participants serving as observers. Onsite facilitators and a dedicated online moderator will guide participants through the same five-stage process using shared digital workspaces and collaborative tools. Groups will document challenges, stakeholder maps, proposed responses, governance considerations, safeguards and action commitments. Online and onsite discussions will be connected through shared outputs, plenary exchanges and facilitator synthesis. Accessible materials, clear instructions and structured activities will support meaningful participation, ensuring all participants contribute to the final workshop outcomes.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** JAMES BUKOLA , EduWiki Hub
+**Organizer 2:** Barakat Adegboye, EduWiki Hub
+**Organizer 3:** Rhoda James, EduWiki Hub
+**Organizer 4:** Rita Maliqi, EduWiki Hub
+**Organizer 5:** Winnie  Kabintie, Wikimedia
+**Organizer 6:** Yusuf Ganyana  Juma, Kenya National Library Service
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** JAMES BUKOLA , Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 2:** Barakat Adegboye, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 3:** Winnie  Kabintie, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 4:** Yusuf Ganyana  Juma, Government, African Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Rita Maliqi, Civil Society, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Rita Maliqi, Civil Society, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Rhoda James, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+4.4
+4.5
+4.7
+4.a
+9.5
+9.c
+10.2
+10.3
+16.6
+16.7
+16.9
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #202 Lessons from Multistakeholder Collaboration for Local Access
+
+## Description
+
+Civil society, the technical community and for- and not-for-profit community connectivity providers have been engaging telecoms regulators in Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean for more than a decade, with the dual goal of building recognition of the value and feasibility of community-based connectivity solutions for bridging the internet access gap, and achieving enabling policy and regulatory environments for local access providers. Over time, the interaction between these actors has changed dramatically. At the beginning, community networks felt they were simply not heard or taken seriously. Today, many are not only working in partnership with the community connectivity sector, several regulators have introduced community-connectivity-friendly licensing options and creative approaches to spectrum allocation.
+
+The story of how regulators in Africa and LAC have shifted their stance towards community connectivity providers demonstrates the success and impact of three important internet governance processes:
+
+a) multistakeholder collaboration
+b) evidence-based policy and regulation
+c) building a bottom-up movement among advocates and activists for the unconnected
+
+This session will bring together regulators, civil society advocacy groups (APC), multistakeholder networks (KictaNet) members of the internet technical community (ISOC) and community connectivity providers themselves who have lived and worked through this transition — from contestation, when regulators were not interested, to collaboration, with regulators and others working together to find solutions for connecting the unconnected or the "barely connected."
+
+By creating an opportunity for them to share their stories, this workshop will capture the lessons learned and document them in a format that can be shared with others.
+
+The session will not just talk about multistakeholder digital governance as an abstract ideal — it will explore how it has evolved through ups and downs in practice, in the specific context of community connectivity, towards the ultimate goal of digital inclusion.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. What, from the perspective of the different stakeholder groups, have been the main barriers and/or enablers of effective and influential engagement?
+B. Is there evidence of capacity building gains and of regulatory decisions being influenced as a result of engagement between regulators and other stakeholders? If so what examples are there and are there differences between the two regions?
+C. What is needed to strengthen these relationships and engagement?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+**The main objective:** to gather and synthesize lessons from the experience of civil society, community networks and the technical community's advocacy for regulatory change, with a focus on improving the effectiveness of these efforts to secure official recognition and enabling policies for community-centred connectivity.
+Lessons learned capture here will be included in a case study that KictaNet will publish in early 2027 together with the Diplo Foundation's CADE project.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** A 90‑minute roundtable format is best suited to this session because the goal is genuine peer dialogue among regulators, community connectivity providers, civil society and the technical community, rather than one‑way presentations. The roundtable layout allows participants to face each other and interact as equals, mirroring the multistakeholder collaboration the workshop seeks to highlight. Short, focused interventions from each stakeholder group will be followed by a moderated conversation where speakers and attendees can respond directly to one another’s experiences from Africa and LAC.
+
+Ninety minutes are needed to provide concise scene‑setting, allow a substantial exchange among roundtable participants, and integrate questions and comments from onsite and online attendees. This depth of discussion is essential to surface nuanced lessons on the shift from contestation to collaboration in community‑centred connectivity and to identify practical recommendations that participants can adapt in their own contexts.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will treat on-site and online participants as a single integrated group. All speakers will use the official IGF platform, and the onsite moderator will regularly invite questions and comments from both the room and the online space, with the online moderator bringing chat interventions into the roundtable. Short initial inputs from each stakeholder group will be followed by a moderated conversation and targeted questions that invite responses from participants, not just speakers. We will avoid long presentations and keep interventions concise to allow interaction. To deepen engagement, we will use simple collaborative tools like slido so that onsite and online participants can post key lessons and recommendations during the session. These joint contributions will be displayed live and form the basis of a short synthesis to be shared after the workshop.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Mwendwa Kivuva, KICTANet
+**Organizer 2:** Anriette Esterhuysen, African School on Internet Governance
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Yumna Panday, Technical Community, African Group
+**Speaker 2:** Charley Lewis, Government, African Group
+**Speaker 3:** Mwangi Michuki, Technical Community, African Group
+**Speaker 4:** Bruna Zanolli, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 5:** RENATA SANTOYO, Government, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 6:** Dennis Sonoiya, Government, African Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Anriette Esterhuysen, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Mwendwa Kivuva, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Anriette Esterhuysen, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+1.4
+4.3
+4.4
+5.b
+8.2
+8.5
+9.c
+10.2
+16.7
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #214 Maintaining AI’s Open Foundations: A Shared Responsibility
+
+## Description
+
+AI innovation depends on a vast, often invisible layer of open digital infrastructure: the open source software, protocols, standards and technical communities that enable interoperability, security, technological diversity and innovation across the digital economy. These shared foundations are often maintained by small teams, individual maintainers and organisations with limited long-term funding.
+
+As governments increase their focus on AI, digital sovereignty and strategic technology capability, sustaining the open digital infrastructure on which these ambitions depend is an increasingly important public policy issue. At the same time, AI is changing the work of maintainers through increased automated contributions and vulnerability reports, new security and governance pressures. Together, these developments strengthen the case for more deliberate and sustained investment in open digital infrastructure.
+
+This session will explore how public institutions, industry, funders and the Internet community can better recognise, fund and steward the open infrastructure on which AI and the wider Internet depend. It will draw on practical examples, including the UK Government’s Digital Standards Strategy, which positions digital technical standards as essential to innovation, resilience and international interoperability; Kenya's National Open Source Programme Office under the Open Source Ecosystem Enabler project; Nominet’s DNS Fund as a commitment to sustaining critical open-source Internet infrastructure, and public investment models such as the Sovereign Tech Agency, which frames open digital infrastructure as foundational to digital sovereignty, economic competitiveness and societal resilience.
+
+Discussion will consider how targeted investment can address persistent underinvestment in shared digital foundations on which governments, businesses and citizens rely. It will examine how open standards and open-source technologies support interoperability, choice and resilience without contributing to fragmentation.
+
+Participants will leave with a clearer view of the shared responsibilities governments, industry, funders and technical communities have towards open digital infrastructure and the practical models needed to sustain them in the age of AI.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. What are the respective responsibilities of governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community and other funders in sustaining the open source software, Internet infrastructure and standards that AI and digital services depend on?
+
+B. How can countries pursue digital sovereignty and strategic technology capability while preserving a globally interoperable, open Internet?
+
+C. What practical funding, governance and skills models are needed to sustain the maintainers of critical open digital infrastructure as AI changes software development and maintenance?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+The session will produce a clearer shared understanding of open digital infrastructure as a public good and a foundation for responsible AI, digital sovereignty and Internet resilience.
+
+Participants will identify practical models for investing in critical open source software, standards and technical communities, drawing on examples from government strategy, public funding, Internet governance and philanthropic or industry-backed initiatives.
+
+The discussion will generate a short set of principles or takeaways on shared responsibility for maintaining open digital infrastructure, including how to align AI investment with long-term infrastructure resilience, how to support maintainers, and how to avoid sovereignty approaches that could fragment the Internet.
+
+The session could feed into follow-up dialogue between government, Internet technical bodies, funders and open-source communities on sustainable funding models for critical digital infrastructure. This could be facilitated through the IGF policy network on open digital infrastructure.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 60
+**Format description:** A 60-minute roundtable is best suited because the session is designed to move beyond diagnosis towards shared responsibility and practical action. The topic cuts across government policy, open-source maintenance, Internet governance, standards development and funding. A roundtable format will allow short provocations from different stakeholder perspectives, followed by structured discussion with onsite and online participants.
+
+The session would begin with brief interventions from government, an Internet infrastructure funder, an open-source maintainer or funding body, and an Internet governance organisation.
+
+The moderator would then guide discussion around the three policy questions, using audience input to test where responsibilities currently sit and what new models are needed. This format supports dialogue rather than presentation, encourages diverse views, and aligns with the IGF’s multistakeholder approach.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session is an interactive hybrid roundtable rather than a traditional panel. Speakers will be asked to make short 5 minute opening contributions, focused on one practical challenge or example. We plan to run a short survey with open source maintainers on the impact of AI ahead of the session to share results. The onsite moderator will guide discussion around the policy questions, while the online moderator will actively gather questions and reflections from remote participants.
+
+To support balanced participation, the session will use short audience prompts, live polling and a shared online note taking space. Online participants will be invited to respond to the same questions as onsite participants, with the moderator regularly bringing their contributions into the room. The session will close by asking participants to identify one practical action relevant actors could take to better sustain open digital infrastructure.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Amy O'Donnell, Nominet
+**Organizer 2:** Elaine Quinn, Nominet
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Elaine Quinn, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Nikita Bhangu, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 3:** Paul Sharratt, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 4:** Ikua Evns, Government, African Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Elaine Quinn, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Amy O'Donnell, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Amy O'Donnell, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+4.4
+8.2
+9.5
+9.c
+16.6
+16.7
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #225 Can AI Change Who Shapes Open Internet Standards?
+
+## Description
+
+Policymakers, civil society and technical communities increasingly depend on one another as the overlap between public policy objectives and the design and operation of the Internet continues to grow. Multistakeholder interaction within open Internet standardisation has therefore become an increasingly important dimension of Internet governance. It is also challenging, and the emergence of AI raises new questions.
+
+At the root of these challenges is a fundamental gap: different communities use different terminology, evidence, timelines, incentives, mandates and sources of legitimacy. Assessing the technical implications of policy interventions, or the societal, political and economic implications of technical standards, is difficult. Participation is further constrained by lengthy deliberations on technically complex topics and the large volume of standards outputs, only some of which ultimately see deployment.
+
+AI brings both opportunities and risks. It may lower barriers to participation through summarisation, translation, drafting and analysis, making complex technical discussions more accessible. At the same time, AI-generated contributions may reshape open standards processes by introducing new challenges for transparency, accountability, consensus formation, information overload and the evaluation of technical arguments. As AI-assisted participation moves from isolated experiments to practical deployment, important questions arise about who shapes open Internet standards and how this may affect multistakeholder Internet governance.
+
+The workshop will be a moderated discussion with active onsite and online participation. Participants will first identify the barriers they encounter when engaging with standardisation processes, followed by reflections from the panellists. The discussion will then examine how AI is being used in standardisation, where it can improve collaboration, and where it may create new challenges. The session will conclude by identifying areas of agreement, disagreement and priorities for further work.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. How is AI changing the ability of policymakers, civil society and technical communities to shape discussions and outcomes in open Internet standardisation, and what does this mean for multistakeholder Internet governance?
+
+B. Which challenges may be addressed through technical or procedural responses and safeguards, which require changes in relationships, processes or institutions, and where is further evidence or discussion needed?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+This workshop will identify open questions, evidence gaps and priorities to guide the multistakeholder discussion and collaboration on AI-assisted participation in open Internet standardisation.
+
+The workshop will start by clarifying how barriers among policymakers, civil society and technical communities shape participation, how AI may reduce some barriers while reinforcing or creating others, and how AI may affect the distribution of influence within multistakeholder Internet governance. Panellists and participants will then identify which questions may be addressed through technical or procedural responses and safeguards, and which require further discussion about relationships, processes or institutions.
+
+A report will capture these findings and set out an agenda for continued work in this emerging area. The organisers will take this forward through multistakeholder exchanges and related research within the IRTF, particularly RASPRG, sharing the resulting work through relevant IETF, IAB, W3C, RIRs and Internet governance channels and using it to inform future IGF activity.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** The workshop will use a 90-minute round-table format to support direct exchange among panellists and onsite and online participants. The session will be a moderated discussion, supported by polls and structured requests for input through online tools. The moderators will incorporate these contributions throughout the discussion.
+
+The round-table layout will facilitate exchange across civil society, policymakers, industry, academia and the technical community, bringing together different regional and institutional perspectives. The 90-minute duration will provide time to introduce the issue, gather participant input, hear short reflections and concrete examples from the panellists, examine areas of agreement and disagreement, and conclude by identifying open questions and priorities for further discussion.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** This will be a participant-led discussion. Onsite and online participants will join the discussion directly by requesting the floor, submitting questions through the chat and responding to prompts from the moderators. The online moderator will monitor remote interventions and chat contributions, while the onsite moderator will move between onsite and online speakers and connect participant input with short reflections and examples from the panellists.
+
+To further engage online and onsite participants, the session will complement the official IGF platform, polling and written-input tools will be accessible online and in the room through a link or QR code. The online moderator will consolidate these inputs and present the main themes at designated points in the session. This will surface recurring concerns, less visible perspectives and priorities that may not emerge through direct interventions alone. The closing synthesis will combine the live discussion with the consolidated input from onsite and online participants.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Dirk Kutscher, Internet Research Task Force
+**Organizer 2:** Castro Ignacio, Queen Mary University of London
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Anriette Esterhuysen, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 2:** Mark Nottingham, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 3:** Esteve Esteve Sanz, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Moderator
+
+Castro Ignacio, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Castro Ignacio, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Castro Ignacio, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.c
+16.6
+16.7
+16.8
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #256 Trust, Access, Control: The Global VPN Oversight Debate
+
+## Description
+
+VPNs have evolved from a corporate security tool into essential infrastructure for individuals, small businesses, and civil society worldwide, offering privacy, security, and cross-border access to information. As governments increasingly move to regulate, restrict, or block VPN services, citing national security, sovereignty, and cybercrime concerns, the debate has become a flashpoint for broader questions about encryption, network sovereignty, and open Internet access.
+
+This session, organized by the VPN Trust Initiative (VTI), an industry initiative of the i2Coalition, brings together a geographically and professionally diverse panel spanning government, civil society, technical standards bodies, and industry to examine these questions rigorously and fairly.
+
+Discussion will center on the tension between legitimate security and governance interests and the risks that over-broad regulation poses to privacy, security, and Internet openness. Panelists will explore how objectives like national security and cybercrime prevention can be balanced against privacy and free expression; the real-world effects of licensing regimes, registration requirements, app store restrictions, and lawful access mandates on users and the broader Internet ecosystem; the role of international standards bodies like the ITU and multistakeholder processes in shaping VPN governance; what separates proportionate regulation from measures that undermine VPN security and utility; whether restricting consumer VPN use is justifiable when institutional actors continue to rely on the same technology; and what evidence actually supports the risks commonly attributed to VPNs.
+
+Rather than advocating for a single outcome, this session is designed to surface the strongest arguments on all sides and identify where common ground, or principled disagreement, remains.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. Where is the line between proportionate VPN regulation that serves legitimate national security and cybercrime objectives, and measures that undermine the privacy, security, and free expression rights VPNs are designed to protect?
+B. What role should international standards bodies and multistakeholder processes play in shaping VPN governance frameworks, and how can they help ensure that oversight remains consistent with an open, interoperable global Internet?
+C. What role should international standards bodies and multistakeholder processes play in shaping VPN governance frameworks, and how can they ensure that mechanisms like licensing, registration, and lawful access mandates don't fragment the global Internet?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+This session aims to advance shared understanding across stakeholders who often talk past each other on VPN oversight, clarifying where security and governance interests genuinely conflict with privacy and openness concerns, and where they don't.
+
+VTI will publish a written summary of key points and areas of agreement or disagreement, informing its ongoing engagement with governments and standards bodies, including work referencing ITU processes, and feeding into its broader research and advocacy on VPN policy.
+
+Participants will hear perspectives they might not otherwise encounter together: government rationale for oversight measures, civil society and technical accounts of real-world effects, and industry's security case for VPNs. They'll leave with a sharper framework for evaluating oversight proposals and awareness of evidentiary gaps in current debates.
+
+## Format
+
+Theater
+**Duration (minutes):** 60
+**Format description:** A theater layout and 60-minute format work because this session is about hearing different viewpoints, not producing a document or working through an exercise in small groups. Theater seating fits a large audience and still leaves room for questions after the panel talks. An hour is enough time to introduce the topic, let panelists respond to each other, and take questions from the room. Since the goal is to lay out the strongest arguments on each side, not reach an agreement, a panel discussion in front of a full audience works better than breaking into smaller groups.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** i2Coalition has run multiple hybrid IGF sessions and brings that experience here. The moderator will alternate between onsite and online speakers at set points, not just when there's a lull, and a dedicated onsite rapporteur will monitor chat and relay online questions in real time. Remote speakers will be part of the panel itself, with audio and video tested in advance to avoid delays. Discussion questions will be shared and displayed on screen so online participants can follow along and prepare contributions, and speaking time will be tracked to keep onsite and online voices roughly balanced.
+
+Alongside the official IGF hybrid platform, we'll use a shared live Q&A tool (like Slido or Mentimeter) so onsite and online attendees submit and upvote questions in one combined queue, rather than splitting in-room mics from chat. Slides and key questions will also be posted in chat for easy reference.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Snead David, 🔒Secure Hosting Alliance
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Venetia Argyropoulou, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Sebastian Schaub, Private Sector, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 3:** Robbert Hoving, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 4:** Linda Bonyo, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Snead David, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Christian Dawson, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Christian Dawson, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+10. Reduced Inequalities
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #297 Resilience in Conflict: Protecting Internet Infrastructure
+
+## Description
+
+When conflict strikes, Internet infrastructure becomes both a lifeline and a target. In the MENA region, people have experienced Internet shutdowns, intentional destruction of communication networks, and weaponisation of digital infrastructure in the form of attacks against civilians. However, most resilience frameworks for the Internet were built on the assumption of peace, effective governance, institutional capacity, and the organisational ability to enforce technical measures. This session, organised by the ISOC MENA Internet Governance Working Group, will discuss the requirements of Internet resilience in conflict and crisis environments. Technical experts, civil society, policymakers, and community network operators will come together to understand how Internet infrastructure withstands conflicts, what governance frameworks are required to protect connectivity for civilian populations, and how AI systems incorporated into Internet infrastructure impact resilience. The MENA region is unique in the world because it offers the lived experience of what it takes to keep connectivity alive when state-run infrastructure is down. In this session, expertise on the MENA region is brought into the global IGF dialogue, and the lessons the international governance community could learn from it will be discussed. In addition, the session will contribute to the general IGF 2026 theme of AI and the future Internet. As AI systems are integrated into infrastructure, conflict environments pose distinct challenges, including AI-driven targeting and surveillance, large-scale disinformation campaigns, and the use of AI tools to detect and disrupt communication networks. The resilience of the Internet of intelligence will require governance frameworks that address these threats.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+- What technical and governance mechanisms are needed to protect civilian Internet infrastructure and connectivity during conflict?
+- How should Internet governance frameworks address the weaponisation of digital infrastructure, including AI-enabled surveillance and network disruption, in conflict contexts?
+- What can the international Internet governance community learn from MENA communities' lived experience of maintaining connectivity under crisis conditions?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+The participants will gain better insight into the specific technical and governance weaknesses exposed by the conflict contexts surrounding the current Internet resilience framework. At the end of the session, a set of recommendations will be produced on how the processes of global Internet governance, including GDC implementation and the IGF's intersessional work, can better take into account conflict and crisis contexts. The recommendations will be used to draft the 2027 work plan for the Internet Society MENA Internet Governance Working Group and disseminated among the relevant IGF Policy Networks. A session report will be produced and published via Internet Society MENA. The session is intended to establish connections between technical resilience specialists and NGOs working in conflict-affected regions of the MENA.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** The roundtable format has been carefully considered in this case, as this meeting requires dialogue between practitioners with practical experience and the framework designers. A classroom format would erect a barrier between the expertise in the room and those who have to interact with it. Ninety minutes will allow covering both technical and governance issues related to this topic. It is not an abstract topic, and it is highly contextual. As such, a presentation would not do justice to the weight and specificity of this subject.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will begin with a quick introduction of the moderator, providing online participants with some orientation to the discussion. Online participants will be able to ask questions throughout the process via a common platform, which will be moderated by the online moderator. At least one speaker will participate online to model hybrid inclusion from the start. The onsite moderator will explicitly invite online contributions at each transition point in the session. The rapporteur will monitor the online chat for substantive contributions and flag them in real time.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Noha Abdel Baky, North Africa IGF
+**Organizer 2:** Raneem Zaitoun, Inskillz OU
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Amged B Shwehdy, Intergovernmental Organization, African Group
+**Speaker 2:** Raghdan Orsud, Civil Society, African Group
+**Speaker 3:** Jacques Bakaev, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Noha Abdel Baky, Civil Society, African Group
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Raneem Zaitoun, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Abdulrahman Abotaleb, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+10. Reduced Inequalities
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #344 Governing Open-Source AI Agents for Public Good
+
+## Description
+
+As AI systems evolve from chatbots into agents capable of planning, calling tools and executing workflows, public institutions face a new governance challenge. Open-source AI agents may strengthen transparency, local adaptation, digital sovereignty and public-sector capacity building, but they also raise urgent questions around cybersecurity, accountability, procurement, liability and human oversight.
+
+This workshop examines how open-source agentic AI should be governed when deployed in public- interest contexts. It will begin with a concise state-of-the-art briefing explaining the current open- source agentic AI stack, including open models, agent frameworks, tool integration, permission layers, runtime environments, evaluation methods and monitoring. The briefing will highlight why agents differ from conventional AI applications: they do not only generate outputs, but can interact with systems and produce real-world consequences.
+
+The main part of the session will be interactive. Participants from government, academia, technical communities, civil society and industry will map key risks, including prompt injection, excessive agency, insecure tool access, data leakage, weak auditability and unclear responsibility for agent
+actions. The discussion will then move from risk identification to governance design: what should regulation require, what should public procurement demand, what should be treated as public digital infrastructure, and what can remain market-led or community-led?
+
+The session will explore whether an Open Agentic AI Commons could support responsible public- sector adoption through shared evaluation tools, procurement templates, reference architectures, security practices, training resources, and deployment playbooks. The goal is not to promote open- source AI uncritically, but to examine how openness, security, accountability, and public capacity can be aligned.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. Which parts of the open-source agentic AI stack should be considered public digital infrastructure, and which should remain market-led or community-led?
+B. How can regulation and public procurement foster open-source AI agents while ensuring cybersecurity, accountability, human oversight, fundamental rights and long-term maintainability?
+C. What shared resources should be included in an Open Agentic AI Commons to help public institutions deploy AI agents responsibly across different regional and institutional contexts?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+Participants will leave with a clearer understanding of how agentic AI differs from conventional AI systems, why open-source agents create both public-interest opportunities and security risks, and what practical governance mechanisms are needed before such systems are deployed in public institutions.
+
+Participants will also identify candidate components for an Open Agentic AI Commons, such as evaluation tools, red-teaming practices, prompt-injection test cases, reference architectures, procurement templates, public-sector deployment playbooks and training materials.
+
+The workshop will produce a co-developed draft checklist for responsible public-sector use of open-source AI agents, synthesising inputs from participants during the session. The checklist will reflect shared perspectives on procurement criteria, governance requirements, security safeguards,
+auditability principles, human oversight, liability considerations and capacity-building needs, and will serve as a preliminary, non-binding output to inform further community and policy development.
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** The session is designed as an interactive governance workshop rather than a conventional panel. A roundtable layout supports direct exchange between policymakers, technologists, public-sector practitioners, civil society, academia and industry. The topic requires both technical orientation and structured policy discussion: participants first need a shared understanding of open-source agentic AI before debating governance, procurement and security requirements.
+
+The 90-minute duration allows the session to move through four stages: a concise state-of-the-art briefing, short stakeholder responses, interactive risk mapping, and collaborative development of a public-sector deployment checklist. A shorter format would leave insufficient time for meaningful audience participation and would risk becoming a one-way presentation. The roundtable format also supports hybrid participation, as online participants can contribute through live polling, shared documents and moderated interventions alongside onsite attendees.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will be designed for equal participation from onsite and online attendees. After a short state-of-the-art briefing, the moderator will use live polling to identify the audience’s main concerns about open-source AI agents, including security, procurement, accountability and public infrastructure. Onsite and online participants will contribute to the same interactive exercises through a shared polling tool and collaborative document.
+
+The moderator will alternate between onsite and online questions throughout the session, rather than leaving online input until the end. A designated online facilitator will monitor the chat, collect questions, surface remote interventions and ensure online participants can contribute to the risk- mapping and checklist-building exercises.
+
+The session will use tools such as Slido, Mentimeter or an equivalent polling platform, plus a shared document or digital whiteboard to co-develop the draft public-sector checklist for responsible deployment of open-source AI agents.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Hailan Wang, TUM
+**Organizer 2:** Till Zacher, TUM
+**Organizer 3:** Nico Caballero, SPARK Foundation
+**Organizer 4:** Ricardo Aveiro, Internet Society Paraguay
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Hailan Wang, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 2:** Nico Caballero, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 3:** Ricardo Aveiro, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Nico Caballero, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Till Zacher, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Ricardo Aveiro, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+4. Quality Education
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals
@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #360 Do look up! LEO Satellites and the Internet Future
+
+## Description
+
+Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite constellations are rapidly becoming a new layer of global Internet infrastructure as the Open Knowledge Foundation has shown through its SkyCommons Observatory. As these networks expand, they will shape not only how people connect to the Internet but also where artificial intelligence services are deployed, how digital resilience is achieved during crises, and how digital sovereignty is exercised.
+Ahead of WRC27 and other relevant governance discussions, public interest stakeholders remain fragmented across telecommunications, space policy and Internet governance. Questions about interoperability, accountability, transparency and public-interest oversight have not kept pace with the rapid deployment of commercial constellations. This discussion will examine whether LEO connectivity should be understood as critical Internet infrastructure and what strategies can we craft for the upcoming processes to preserve openness, resilience, interoperability and equitable access while supporting innovation.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+If LEO constellations become a foundational layer of the Internet and AI ecosystem, what governance principles should shape them before market structures and technical architectures become irreversible?
+What technical, policy and governance mechanisms can promote interoperability, transparency and accountability in orbital connectivity?
+How can governments, the technical community and civil society ensure that expanding LEO connectivity strengthens digital inclusion and resilience without increasing concentration and dependency?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+The workshop will strengthen dialogue between Internet governance and space governance communities around a rapidly emerging infrastructure challenge.
+Participants will contribute to a draft blueprint for a positive agenda for LEO satellites and also a playing field map for the relevant processes in the next 18 months.  The session will also help establish a cross-sector network interested in continuing work on orbital connectivity within future Internet governance discussions via the SkyCommons initiative.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 60
+**Format description:** It is the best format to hear all voices. We want to have a collaborative yet deep conversation around the topic and co create as we speak.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will begin with a short presentation introducing key findings from the SkyCommons Observatory, followed by moderated interventions from each stakeholder group. Audience participation will be prioritised through alternating questions from onsite and online participants. The online moderator will monitor the virtual queue to ensure equal participation. We will use live polling and leverage our asynchronous discuss.okfn.org  for this purpose.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Renata Avila, 🔒Open Knowledge Foundation
+**Organizer 2:** Burcu Kilic, Center for International Governance Innovation
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Coyle Nathan, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Burcu Kilic, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 3:** Marilia Maciel, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 4:** Renata Avila, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Burcu Kilic, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Lucas Pretti, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Burcu Kilic, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+10. Reduced Inequalities
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #374 The UnTraining Dilemma: "Right to be Forgotten" in AI Models
+
+## Description
+
+Primary Focus
+The session centers on a core technological paradox: Global privacy laws require a "Right to be Forgotten," but GenAI models currently lack a built-in way to delete specific ingested data.
+Short Description & Key Topics Covered
+The event explains "Machine Unlearning"—the technical challenge of making AI models selectively "forget" personal data, copyrighted code, or sensitive information without having to retrain multi-billion-parameter models from scratch.  We will address three core topics during this session:
+1. Legal vs. Neural Reality: Explaining the "Baked Cake" analogy—why deleting data from a standard database is simple, but extracting data from neural network weights is mathematically complex.
+2. The Machine Unlearning Solution: Clarifying emerging technical methods for targeted data removal and demonstrating why full model retraining violates sustainable "Green AI" practices.
+3. Shared Governance & Standards: Linking policymakers and AI developers to establish proper compliance standards, verifiable "Proof of Unlearning," data provenance, and shared accountability.
+
+What Sets This Session Apart
+Unlike traditional AI governance panels that focus purely on the legal philosophy of privacy, this session confronts the urgent, applied technical reality of enforcement. While previous IGF discussions have debated whether data should be deleted, we address the mathematical roadblock of actually doing it.  Furthermore, we introduce a critical dimension to the privacy debate: The Environmental Cost of Compliance. We will highlight how forcing full model retraining to meet legal deletion requests actively violates green energy targets, establishing Machine Unlearning not just as a privacy workaround, but as a mandatory foundation for Sustainable AI.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+Harmonization & Legal Enforcement: How can global data protection regimes reconcile statutory mandates for individual erasure (e.g., the "Right to be Forgotten") with Generative AI architectures, where data deletion cannot mirror traditional database record removal?
+
+Standards & Technical Verification: What standards, technical criteria, and governance frameworks are needed to establish verifiable "Proof of Unlearning," ensuring regulatory compliance without placing unreasonable audit burdens on AI developers?
+
+Sustainability & Policy Alignment: How can privacy enforcement balance strict legal compliance with global sustainability commitments, considering the substantial carbon footprint and energy demands associated with full model retraining?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+Expected Outcomes & Outputs
+1. Tangible Outputs & Deliverables
+
+**Interdisciplinary Policy Brief:** An open-access synthesis mapping machine unlearning benchmarks to data protection requirements, published via NIXI.
+
+**Unlearning Verification Framework:** A draft blueprint defining metrics for "Verifiable Proof of Erasure" to inform standards bodies (IEEE, ISO/IEC, ITU-T).
+
+**Sustainable AI Policy Note:** Recommendations submitted to IGF Dynamic Coalitions on balancing algorithmic enforcement with environmental sustainability.
+
+2. Participant Takeaways
+
+Algorithmic & Regulatory Literacy: Understanding the "Baked Cake" paradigm—contrasting neural network parameter weights with standard database deletion.
+
+**Multi-Stakeholder Alignment:** Regulators explore computational friction and carbon intensity, while ML practitioners internalize privacy rights frameworks.
+
+**Operational Compliance Matrix:** A practical heuristic tool for decision-makers to triage deletion requests, evaluating unlearning, full model retraining, and alternative compliance paths.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** 1. Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue: A roundtable layout dismantles the traditional speaker-versus-audience divide, establishing an inclusive, collaborative space. By bridging complex machine learning concepts with high-level legal policy, this setup fosters active peer-to-peer dialogue, transforming attendees from passive listeners into true co-contributors during interactive segments.
+
+2. Depth for a Complex Paradox: Unpacking the intersection of generative AI, the "Right to be Forgotten," and green energy constraints demands dedicated time. A 90-minute duration provides the necessary runway to introduce the technical "Baked Cake" paradigm accessibly, while reserving generous space for deep thematic analysis across our diverse panel.
+
+3. Seamless Hybrid Q&A Execution: The open room layout allows the Onsite Moderator to effortlessly navigate microphoned audience contributions. This setup powers our 35-minute alternating Q&A framework, ensuring natural engagement for physical attendees while keeping the dedicated Online Moderator fully synchronized with virtual chat inputs and Slido polling.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** Interaction & Dynamic Moderation
+We will deploy an Onsite Moderator and a dedicated Online Moderator to maintain a strict 1:1 alternating Q&A queue. The Online Moderator will read virtual questions into the microphone to ensure full transcript integration. Remote and in-person speakers will receive equal floor time.
+
+Inclusive Design & Parity
+To prevent digital fatigue, presentation decks will use high-contrast, low-bandwidth graphics illustrating core technical concepts. Speakers will address the camera, pacing interventions to accommodate live interpretation. A one-page concept PDF will be distributed via chat and QR code at minute zero.
+
+Tools & Platforms
+We will use Slido as a unified platform for both audiences. A 10-second opening poll will gauge the room's expertise to calibrate technical depth, while unified Q&A upvoting will highlight the most pressing audience queries.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Yash Vashishth, National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI)
+**Organizer 2:** Mudassir Inam, National Internet Exchange of India
+**Organizer 3:** Nikhil Raj, National Internet Exchange of India
+**Organizer 4:** Abhishek Anand, NIXI
+**Organizer 5:** Sandeep Singh,  National Internet Exchange of India
+**Organizer 6:** Sameer Gahlot, National Internet Exchange of India
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Luca Belli, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 2:** Nicolo Zingales, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
+**Speaker 3:** Rojszczak Marcin, Technical Community, Eastern European Group
+**Speaker 4:** Rolf H. Weber, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Yash Vashishth, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Sandeep Singh, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Abhishek Anand, Intergovernmental Organization, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.4
+9.5
+9.b
+16.10
+17.14
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #383 Post-Quantum Migration: Governing a Global Transition
+
+## Description
+
+Encryption underpins public and private services delivered over the Internet, including government services, financial transactions, healthcare systems, digital identities, software distribution and critical infrastructure. Advances in quantum computing threaten many of the public-key cryptographic algorithms on which these services rely, creating an urgent need to migrate to post-quantum cryptography.
+Policymakers and regulators will play an essential role in accelerating this transition. Requirements introduced without sufficient understanding of technical dependencies could lead to fragmented approaches, incompatible implementations or unnecessary costs. These challenges may be particularly significant for developing countries, which face limited technical capacity and longer infrastructure lifecycles, risking widening existing digital divides.
+Governments face legitimate public policy objectives, including national security, resilience, protection of critical infrastructure and digital sovereignty. The challenge is to pursue these objectives while maintaining the interoperability on which the global Internet depends. The workshop will examine how these objectives can be balanced through effective coordination between policymakers and the technical community.
+This session will bring together policymakers, regulators, the technical community, private sector and civil society to examine the technical and governance considerations involved in PQC migration. Drawing on experience from the IETF and the technical community, it will explore how public policy can support global standards, encourage preparation, provide regulatory certainty and address sectors that may struggle to migrate.
+The discussion will consider questions such as when regulatory intervention is useful, how migration should reflect technical readiness and risk, how procurement and reporting requirements can encourage progress, and how governments and regulators can participate effectively in the standards processes.
+Short expert presentations will provide context, but the workshop will focus primarily on dialogue among policymakers, regulators, technical experts, industry and civil society. Its goal will be to develop practical recommendations for policy and regulatory approaches that accelerate PQC migration while preserving global interoperability and security.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+A. How should technical standards bodies, industry, governments and regulators coordinate responsibilities and timelines for a globally interoperable transition to post-quantum cryptography?
+B. Which policy and regulatory measures are most effective in accelerating migration while avoiding premature mandates, fragmented requirements or barriers to implementation?
+C. What shared practices, information and accountability mechanisms are needed to identify cryptographic dependencies, prioritize migration risks, and support organizations with limited resources or legacy infrastructure, particularly in developing countries?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+The workshop will produce a concise set of multistakeholder observations and recommendations identifying areas of consensus, differing perspectives, and practical actions for advancing a timely, secure and interoperable global PQC migration. These will identify practical actions for standards bodies, technology providers, network and service operators, governments and regulators, including approaches to migration planning, cryptographic inventories, sequencing, interoperability testing, procurement and regulatory coordination.
+Participants will gain a clearer understanding of the technical and governance dependencies that make PQC migration different from an ordinary technology upgrade; the respective roles and constraints of different stakeholder groups; and the risks of both delayed action and poorly coordinated mandates. The session report will capture areas of agreement, unresolved questions and suggested follow-up work. The organizers will share the recommendations through relevant IETF, IAB and Internet governance channels and use them to inform future technical-policy dialogue.
+
+## Format
+
+Classroom
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** A 90-minute classroom format is best suited to the session. The topic is likely to attract a broad audience, but the workshop should remain discussion-led rather than becoming a sequence of presentations. Classroom seating provides greater capacity than a roundtable while enabling more direct interaction than a theatre layout.
+The session will use no more than four speakers plus one moderator. Opening presentations will be limited to five minutes each, leaving approximately 50 minutes for participant discussion and 10 minutes to synthesize recommendations. The moderator will organize contributions around the three policy questions and short migration scenarios, rather than relying on an open-ended question-and-answer period. This provides enough time to compare technical, operational and regulatory perspectives, explore areas of agreement and disagreement, and develop concrete outcomes with meaningful input from onsite and online participants.
+If 90-minute slot is not available, agenda can be re-arranged to fit into 60 minutes.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The session will be designed as a discussion involving onsite and online participants equally. The moderator will alternate between the room and the online, while an online moderator monitors chat and questions. Remote speakers will participate throughout, rather than in a separate segment.
+Opening interventions and discussion prompts will be brief. Participants will respond to live polls on migration readiness, priorities and responsibility, with results used to guide the discussion. A shared online document will allow participants to submit recommendations, identify barriers and react to proposals. Participants will also be invited to contribute examples from their own jurisdictions and organizations, allowing the discussion to compare different regulatory approaches, deployment experiences and operational challenges.
+Submitted questions will be integrated into each discussion segment. The final ten minutes will test the emerging recommendations through a rapid prioritization exercise, ensuring that the conclusions reflect both onsite and online participation.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Rosomakho Yaroslav, Zscaler
+**Organizer 2:** Dhruv Dhody, IAB
+**Organizer 3:** Roman Danyliw, IETF
+**Organizer 4:** Dirk Kutscher, Internet Research Task Force
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Dierdre Connoly, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Michael Parsons, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 3:** Ramy Fathy, Government, African Group
+**Speaker 4:** Rosomakho Yaroslav, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 5:** Elkins Nalini, Private Sector, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Roman Danyliw, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Dhruv Dhody, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Dirk Kutscher, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.1
+16.7
+17.14
+17.16
+17.17
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #414 Internet Resilience for the Age of AI
+
+## Description
+
+For more than four decades, the Internet has demonstrated remarkable resilience through open standards, interoperability, distributed architectures and voluntary cooperation among technical, operational and policy communities. As societies become increasingly dependent on digital services, the Marconi Society Internet Resilience Institute has shown that Internet resilience is the foundation for creating justifiable trust in the digital society. Its Phase 1 work—the Life of a Packet Mapping Framework and the Business Resilience Guide—demonstrates that resilient digital services depend on understanding hidden technical, operational and organizational interdependencies and translating that understanding into practical implementation.
+
+The Internet is now entering a new phase of evolution. Originally designed to connect people, it is increasingly becoming an environment in which autonomous AI agents discover services, exchange information and make operational decisions on behalf of people and organisations. This fundamentally changes the requirements for Internet resilience and governance. Building on the outcomes of the WSIS Forum 2026 session Operationalizing Digital Resilience, this workshop explores how resilience principles can enable justifiable trust for both humans and AI through dependency mapping, operational best practices, trusted operational Internet intelligence and continuous verification.
+
+Through interactive 2035 scenarios, participants will examine how hidden interdependencies influence AI-assisted decisions in critical services and infrastructure. Discussions will address what information Internet operators should expose, how AI can distinguish resilient from fragile infrastructure, where accountability lies when AI acts on inaccurate operational data, and how organizations can safely delegate decisions to autonomous systems.
+
+Holding this discussion at IGF 2026 in Nairobi is particularly important. Africa's rapidly growing digital economy, mobile-first infrastructure and expanding AI ecosystem offer unique perspectives on resilience. Ensuring that diverse regional experiences and real-world failure scenarios inform future resilience frameworks is essential for creating globally relevant Internet governance and building justifiable trust in an Internet increasingly shared by humans and autonomous AI agents.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+1.	How should Internet governance evolve as autonomous AI agents become operational participants on the open Internet rather than simply users of Internet services?
+
+2.	What technical, operational and policy mechanisms are needed to enable humans and autonomous AI agents to establish justifiable trust before acting on Internet-derived information?
+
+3.	What operational Internet information should be made available—in a secure, privacy-preserving and interoperable manner—to enable autonomous systems to assess the trustworthiness of sources, infrastructure and dependencies without compromising security or privacy?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+The workshop will produce:
+•	Candidate principles for Justifiable Trust applicable to both humans and autonomous AI agents.
+•	Recommendations on operational Internet information that AI systems require for trustworthy decision-making.
+•	Community input to Phase 2 of the Marconi Society Internet Resilience Institute's Life of a Packet and Business Resilience Guide initiatives.
+•	Recommendations for future standards, operational practices and Internet governance discussions.
+•	A public workshop report.
+
+Participants will gain practical insight into how Internet resilience principles apply to AI agents operating on the open Internet. Building on the WSIS outcomes, the workshop will identify how dependency mapping, organizational resilience, operational transparency and trusted machine-consumable Internet intelligence can strengthen future Internet governance. Community feedback will directly inform the Internet Resilience Institute's Phase 2 activities and contribute to ongoing discussions on AI governance, Internet architecture and implementation of the Global Digital Compact.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** The roundtable format moves participants beyond discussion into collaborative problem-solving. Following a short introduction to the Marconi Society Internet Resilience Institute's work and the outcomes of the WSIS Forum 2026 session Operationalizing Digital Resilience, participants will work through two or three realistic 2035 resilience scenarios involving autonomous AI agents operating during cloud outages, DNS anomalies, routing incidents or supply-chain disruptions. Rather than discussing resilience in the abstract, participants will explore how hidden interdependencies affect decision-making, what operational information AI agents and human operators need to establish justifiable trust, and which governance, technical and organizational measures are required to strengthen resilience. Candidate scenarios include a hospital whose apparent infrastructure redundancy masks shared dependencies, and a supply chain where hidden common services undermine resilience. A third scenario, reflecting African digital realities, will be developed with regional stakeholders to ensure local relevance while contributing to globally applicable resilience principles.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** The workshop will use a dual-moderation model, combining an experienced on-site moderator with a dedicated online moderator to ensure balanced participation. On-site participants will use room microphones, while remote participants will engage through the virtual platform's hand-raising and chat functions, actively managed by the online moderator.
+
+To maximize interaction, both audiences will participate simultaneously in live digital polling during the 2035 resilience scenarios. Participants will assume the role of an AI agent faced with incomplete operational information and decide whether to proceed, pause, seek additional evidence or escalate to human oversight in situations such as DNS anomalies, routing incidents or cloud disruptions. The aggregated responses will be displayed in real time and used to drive the moderated discussion on resilience, hidden interdependencies and justifiable trust, ensuring equal participation regardless of location while generating practical insights for future Internet governance and resilient AI deployment.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Maarten Botterman, 🔒GNKS Consult BV
+**Organizer 2:** Marina Pappas Marina Pappas, Marconi Society
+**Organizer 3:** Flora Tromelin, Marconi Society
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Maarten Botterman, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Raneem Zaitoun, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
+**Speaker 3:** Philippe Fouquart, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 4:** Ram Mohan, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 5:** Vinton CERF, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Maarten Botterman, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Marina Pappas Marina Pappas, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Flora Tromelin, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+4. Quality Education
+8. Decent Work and Economic Growth
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+11. Sustainable Cities and Communities
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #68 A Multilingual Internet by Advancing Universal Acceptance
+
+## Description
+
+**Full title:** Enabling A Multilingual Internet by Advancing Universal Acceptance, and How AI can Contribute
+Digital technologies benefit society by enabling users to participate in the economy, to learn, connect, and communicate online. For global communities to participate online, the Internet must be accessible in all local languages and scripts. Yet today, millions of people remain unable to use web addresses or email addresses in their own languages or scripts. These languages and scripts are well-supported by technical standards and are technically feasible to implement, but many applications and websites have not been updated to fully support them, preventing these capabilities from reaching users. This is due to missing technical support for Universal Acceptance (UA), a state in which all valid domain names and email addresses are accepted, validated, stored, processed, and displayed correctly and consistently by Internet-enabled applications, devices, and systems.
+
+Despite significant progress, many technology providers have not upgraded their systems, due to lack of awareness, limitations in capacity, or lack of prioritization. All stakeholders need to contribute to promote UA adoption. ICANN collaborates with UNESCO, the ITU and the broader Internet community to raise awareness for the need of UA, and working with technical organizations and universities around the world to build capacity. Engaging Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools can further contribute towards addressing technical barriers and capacity challenges. By using domain names and email addresses to publish local content and communicate online, civil society and end-users can create the necessary awareness and demand.
+
+The session will bring experts from these different stakeholders to discuss how the Internet can be made more multilingual by addressing UA challenges, what has already been achieved and what needs to be done. The session will highlight how AI tools can facilitate UA adoption by updating applications and systems to become UA-ready.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+1. What strategies, policies and incentives should stakeholders use to encourage technology providers and software developers to implement Universal Acceptance in their systems, applications (including email), devices and software?
+
+2. How can AI tools be leveraged effectively to facilitate UA adoption? What are key considerations to ensuring AI tools enable Universal Acceptance for a wide range of languages and scripts online?
+
+3. How can civil society organizations, local communities, International Organizations and other stakeholders stimulate demand for Universal Acceptance of domain names and email addresses?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+- Stakeholders, including civil society, will understand the technical barriers of Universal Acceptance (UA) and why it is a requirement for enabling a multilingual Internet for promoting digital inclusion.
+- Stakeholders understand their role in UA adoption and how to contribute to the work and discussions.
+- Stakeholders understand how to innovate using AI tools to make software applications and systems UA-ready.
+- Inform how the IGF community and intersessional processes can contribute to UA adoption and solutions.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 60
+**Format description:** The session will include a panel from different stakeholders, including tech organizations, public sector, academia and civil society, which will help introduce the different aspects of the challenges and opportunities in 30 minutes. For the second half, the session will engage the audience in a discussion to share their view point on additional mechanisms which can be put in action to address the challenge of addressing Universal Acceptance for a more multilingual Internet. The roundtable format will facilitate the audience to engage in the session and share their input as participants in the discussion and not just listeners.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** ICANN has a proven track record of organizing large-scale hybrid meetings that foster inclusive, multilingual, and globally diverse participation. The session will be supported by both an onsite moderator and a dedicated online moderator to ensure equitable participation from in-person and virtual attendees. The online moderator will monitor Zoom chat, Q&A, and raised hands, integrating questions and comments from remote participants throughout the discussion rather than only at the end. The session is designed to encourage real-time interaction, with balanced opportunities for engagement from both audiences and speakers responding to questions from onsite and online participants throughout. Zoom will support remote participation and interaction, while ICANN and UNESCO communications teams will extend the conversation through X and LinkedIn, encouraging broader engagement before, during, and after the session.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Adam Peake, ICANN
+**Organizer 2:** Rebecca McGilley, 🔒ICANN
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Sathees Babu Chellikattuveli Sivanandan, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 2:** Sarmad Hussain, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
+**Speaker 3:** Theresa Swinehart, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 4:** Xianhong Hu, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Moderator
+
+Theresa Swinehart, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+Adam Peake, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Zacharias Dimitris, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9.1
+9.c
+16.10
+17.6
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+# IGF 2026 WS #86 From Assessment to Impact: Aligning Cyber Capacity Building
+
+## Description
+
+Cyber capacity-building has achieved unprecedented momentum. Over the past decade, governments, development partners, and international organisations have invested substantial resources into national programmes, regional initiatives, and institutional development. The challenge now is not capacity investment, but capability realisation.
+The rapid scaling of cyber capacity-building has created a visible coordination gap. Assessment missions occur in parallel rather than sequenced. Training cycles do not align with institutional readiness. The ecosystem expands, but visibility across it shrinks.
+
+States consistently signal the same preference: sustained, sequenced programmes anchored to national strategy—not one-off workshops.Sustainability requires architecture.Many interventions remain disconnected from the larger institutional development pathway. A cybersecurity training initiative concludes. Personnel turn over. New staff require re-training. The cycle repeats. Without sequencing investments do not compound into lasting state capacity.
+The roundtable will open with CCB insights based on evidence across two regions where UNIDIR holds direct assessment and programming data. The roundtable will subsequently invite governments, donors, regional organisations and implementing partners to explore how existing investments can better support nationally owned, sustainable and evidence-based capacity-building. Discussion will focus on practical proposals for improving coordination, identifying underserved areas, strengthening the translation of needs assessments into programme design, and ensuring that funding contributes to long-term institutional development.
+Governing the internet in the age of intelligence demands that cyber capacity keep pace with capability asymmetries. The gap widens when investments are siloed, when needs assessments gather dust, when donors and states operate on incomplete information. Closing that gap requires shared responsibility—and shared responsibility is operational, not rhetorical.
+Substantive sessions in existing global mechanisms and regional cyber policy bodies—should carry this work forward. Geneva Cyber Week becomes an annual touchpoint where stakeholders may discuss on coordination progress, states update capacity priorities, and implementing partners share lessons learned. Each cycle feeds evidence back into programming decisions.
+
+## Policy Question(s)
+
+•	What mechanisms would enable donors to see the full capacity-building landscape in real time?
+•	How should states signal which capacity investments will generate institutional returns versus which remain tactical needs?
+•	Which cyber capacity-building functions consistently remain underfunded despite documented demand?
+
+## Expected Outcomes
+
+**Key Takeaways Paper:** Closing the Cyber Capacity-Building Coordination Gap : UNIDIR will synthesise the roundtable discussion and regional assessment data into a focused key takeaways paper for circulation to donors, governments, and regional organisations.
+**Geneva Cyber Week Session:** Translating Evidence into Action :The paper is presented and discussed during Geneva Cyber Week, creating visibility among policymakers and providing a platform for donors and states to test implementation approaches and signal commitment to improved coordination.
+
+## Reference Document
+
+Reference Document
+
+## Format
+
+Roundtable
+**Duration (minutes):** 90
+**Format description:** A roundtable is ideal because it sits key donors, select state representatives, regional bodies, 2–3 implementing partners, UNIDIR facilitators. It is small enough that each person contributes but large enough to represent the ecosystem.
+Around a table, participants face each other. No stage. No hierarchy of seating. Equal sight lines force equal engagement. Questions and counter-arguments surface immediately. Misunderstandings get clarified in real time. Parallel solutions emerge through direct conversation, not solo presentations.
+
+## Hybrid Format
+
+**Hybrid Format:** To ensure seamless interaction between onsite and online participants, after the initial kick-off interventions, we will prioritize questions and interventions from the online audience before turning to onsite participants, ensuring inclusivity and equal engagement across both groups. The organizers will also leverage complementary online tools and platforms such as Slido and online polling tools to collect input and encourage engagement during the session. By incorporating these interactive elements and encouraging active participation from both online and onsite attendees, we aim to create a dynamic and inclusive discussion where diverse perspectives are valued, heard, and recorded to inform the non-paper, which will be published in 2027.
+
+## Organizers
+
+**Organizer 1:** Pavel Mraz, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research
+**Organizer 2:** Moliehi Makumane, UNITED NATIONS INSTITUTE FOR DISARMAMENT RESEARCH
+
+## Speakers
+
+**Speaker 1:** Natasha Jackson, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
+**Speaker 2:** Pavel Mraz, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
+**Speaker 3:** Thelma QUAYE, Intergovernmental Organization, African Group
+
+## Moderator
+
+Moliehi Makumane, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Online Moderator
+
+A Kastelic, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Rapporteur
+
+Pavel Mraz, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
+
+## Participant Benefits
+
+What will participants gain from attending this session?
+
+## SDGs
+
+9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
+16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
+17. Partnerships for the Goals