Looking Back: Tracking National Positions in the WSIS+20 Review
Over the course of 2025, a major United Nations (UN) digital governance process, the 20-year review of the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS+20) unfolded. The WSIS+20 Review was a key opportunity to assess the progress made towards the original goal of the WSIS–building a people-centered, inclusive, and development-oriented Information Society.
To support this process, the Global Network Initiative (GNI) and Global Partners Digital (GPD) partnered on a year-long project supported by the inaugural ICANN Grant Program; Shaping the WSIS+20 Review for a Unified Internet Multistakeholderism (SWUIM). The aim was to shape the process through research and multistakeholder dialogues in collaboration with ten civil society partners in eight countries.
The project kicked off with cross-stakeholder workshops in Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, India, Ghana, South Africa, Tanzania, and Zambia, resulting in a report outlining the key priorities, actors, and opportunities for engagement in each of the above eight countries. Partners included the Centre for Communications Governance at the National Law University New Delhi, CIPESA, Data Privacy Brazil, Derechos Digitales, Digitally Right, Fundación Karisma, Media Foundation for West Africa, Paradigm Initiative, and Research ICT Africa.
Over the course of the negotiations, partners participated in the WSIS+20 process, attending global events including the Internet Governance Forum, the twenty-eighth session of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, the 85th ICANN meeting, and the WSIS High-Level Event, as well as regional and national events.
Reviewing the WSIS+20 Review
In a series of blogs, linked below, the project partners reflect on how the review unfolded on a national level. This includes countries’ roles and key positions evolved throughout the review process.
All of the countries this project focused on are members of the Group of 77 + China, which negotiated during the WSIS+20 as a bloc. However, as highlighted in several of the blogs below, countries positions’ did not always fully align with the positions put forward by the bloc. This is somewhat inevitable when such a large group is acting collaboratively and makes analysis of individual countries’ positions all the more relevant.
Key Areas of Discussion
During the review, discussions focused on how WSIS should relate to contemporary agendas on digital transformation and development. This included questions about how WSIS sits alongside newer frameworks such as the Global Digital Compact (GDC), and how to ensure the coherence of the digital governance architecture. As the partners illustrate, there was near-unanimous support for coherence between the GDC and WSIS, but countries had competing ideas of the extent to which WSIS is able to deliver on its digital development goals and the extent to which it is adapted to emerging technologies.
Differing visions for internet governance shaped the review, particularly around the balance between state authority and multistakeholder approaches, and between more centralised and decentralised models of governance. These debates were closely linked to questions of process, including how inclusive the WSIS+20 review itself would be, and how non-governmental stakeholders were able to participate on both a national and international level. Some of the blogs below examine the disconnect between countries’ support for multistakeholderism during negotiations and the extent to which they consulted with national partners, whilst others examine countries’ specific vision of multistakeholderism and how they attempted to realise this vision during the review.
Another key topic was whether the review process would deliver clearer or stronger commitments on human rights. The countries analysed prioritised different rights; some focused on development rights, some on rights related to access and digital divides, and others were focused on delivering a better digital future for specific groups, for instance women and girls. This subject was particularly urgent given the backdrop of geopolitical tension and state uses of technology which undermine or harm rights.
Underpinning all of this were discussions about the future role and mandate of the Internet Governance Forum, and its continued relevance as the pre-eminent global space for dialogue on digital policy. While member states agreed on a permanent mandate for the IGF, there was frustration from some countries about the extent to which this reflected their ambitions to update the Forum in a way which they hoped would improve participation by Global Majority governments.
Looking Forward
Through research, national-level engagement, and sustained participation in global forums, the project partners aimed to strengthen the review process. In doing so, they underscored the continued importance of multistakeholder approaches to internet governance as a practical necessity for delivering more equitable and rights-respecting digital futures. As we move into implementation of the outcomes, non-governmental stakeholders will play a role in contributing to and scrutinising implementation to ensure that the concrete actions agreed upon during the review happen. It remains to be seen how the countries this project focuses on will move forward.
Country Blogs
Project partners reflect on how the review unfolded and how their country’s positions evolved, here: