Multistakeholder Sounding Board flags priorities and gaps in revised WSIS+20 Outcomes Document

The Informal Multistakeholder Sounding Board (IMSB) has published its assessment of Revision 1 of the WSIS+20 Outcomes Document, outlining what it sees as the core strengths of the updated text and where further work is needed. The IMSB, which took part in open consultations held in mid-November, says the revision reflects many contributions from governments, civil society, technical bodies and other stakeholders. It supports the streamlined structure, the reaffirmation of the WSIS vision and the emphasis on strengthening the multistakeholder foundations of the WSIS architecture.

At the same time, the Board identifies several areas that should be retained, reinforced or restored in the next revision. These include language on multistakeholder cooperation, the permanent mandate of the internet Governance Forum (IGF), coherence between WSIS, the Global Digital Compact and the sustainable development goals, and commitments to closing the digital divide. The IMSB stresses that maintaining a focus on meaningful connectivity, financing mechanisms and capacity development is critical for an inclusive and development-oriented Information Society.

Key points highlighted by the IMSB include:

• Elements the Board wants preserved: Commitments to the WSIS vision; recognition of the IGF’s permanent mandate; coherence between WSIS, the GDC and the SDGs; strong language on closing the digital divide; and references to financing and capacity development. The Board also calls for retention of language on tackling internet fragmentation and strengthening follow-up and review processes.

• Areas where language has weakened: The IMSB expresses concern over the removal or softening of text on human rights, including the deletion of references to surveillance, legality, necessity and proportionality. It also notes missing text on the risks associated with artificial intelligence, reduced clarity on corporate accountability, and the weakening of language related to internet fragmentation. Environmental issues, particularly e-waste, have also been thinned out.

• Proposed clarifications:
– On capacity development, the Board urges clearer responsibilities for stakeholders and stronger commitments to financing.
– On technical standards, it recommends replacing ‘harmonisation’ with ‘use of interoperable’ to reflect voluntary adoption.
– On financial mechanisms, it calls for a focused, time-bound task force aligned with the WSIS framework rather than broad digital development.
– On the IGF, the Board recommends expanding references to cover the full range of digital issues reflected in the Tunis Agenda, strengthening the Secretariat housed within UN DESA, and ensuring stable long-term funding.
– On institutional coordination, the Board seeks clearer differentiation between the UN Group on the Information Society (UNGIS) and the Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies (ODET) to avoid overlap.

• Suggestions for follow-up and review: The IMSB proposes that the outcomes document explicitly recognise the role of remote and virtual participation tools, which it sees as essential for inclusive processes, especially for stakeholders from underserved regions. It also recommends reaffirming the importance of reviewing progress on all WSIS action lines and targets.

The IMSB’s reflections underline the importance of ensuring that the WSIS+20 outcome remains forward-looking, accessible and grounded in the multistakeholder model. The Board’s feedback, based on consultations held in November, is expected to feed into the next draft of the outcomes document as negotiations continue ahead of the WSIS+20 High-Level Meeting in 2025.