GPD’s Submission to the IGF 2026 Call for Thematic Inputs

—

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) invites all stakeholders to take part in shaping the IGF 2026 process. Through this open call for thematic input, individuals and organizations from all stakeholder groups and regions of the world are invited to share their perspectives on the most relevant emerging issues, priorities, and challenges in the governance of digital technologies. Contributions will help inform the overarching theme, subthemes, intersessional work and overall programme development of the 21st annual IGF meeting.

---

GPDs submission

Stakeholder Group: Civil Society

Regional Group Eastern European Group

—

Please select up to three thematic areas, including up to three issues per area selected from the dropdown box, the IGF could prioritize in 2026

Digital Cooperation / IGF organisation and role

—

Additional Input

The 2026 IGF should build on two decades of shared commitment while placing greater emphasis on delivery, legitimacy, and implementation — a shift that reflects both the evolving global digital governance landscape and the outcomes of the WSIS+20 review.

The 20-year WSIS review reaffirmed the continuing relevance of the WSIS vision of a “people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society” and anchored this vision firmly in the centrality of human rights and the multistakeholder character of digital governance. These principles are not abstract; they are practical conditions for governance that are credible, effective, and responsive to people’s lived realities.

In addition, IGF 2026 provides an important opportunity to reflect on the continued evolution of the Forum itself. The WSIS+20 outcome resolution invites consideration of the future of the IGF, and the 2026 meeting could use space for an open and constructive multistakeholder dialogue on how the Forum can further strengthen its role within the evolving digital governance ecosystem. Such reflection could help identify ways to enhance the IGF’s contribution to implementation support, policy coherence, and participatory legitimacy across global digital cooperation processes.

IGF 2026 should prioritise

1. Operationalising global commitments with clear mechanisms for delivery.
   While the articulation of principles — including through the Global Digital Compact and WSIS outcomes — provides vital normative grounding, translating these into actions, measurable outcomes, and accountable pathways is essential. Processes such as multistakeholder collaboration, evidence gathering, and peer learning should be foregrounded as mechanisms that reinforce legitimacy by showing what works and why in implementation.

2. Strengthening legitimacy through inclusive multistakeholder practice.
   Legitimacy is not declared — it is built through inclusive, sustained, and transparent engagement across stakeholders, geographies, sectors, and expertise. The IGF should expand on its convening role by deepening participatory design (e.g., structured dialogues, deliberative indicator frameworks) and ensuring that historically underrepresented voices are integrated into thematic workstreams.

3. Encouraging coherence across governance domains.
   The IGF should resist siloed discussions and instead encourage systemic, cross-track engagement — for example, on AI’s intersections with cybersecurity, data governance, digital trust frameworks, and civic space. Such coherence is crucial not only for policy consistency, but for advancing the global digital agenda as a whole.

—

The IGF also relates to major global initiatives and agendas. How can the IGF annual meeting and its intersessional work better reflect or contribute to the implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society, the implementation of the Global Digital Compact and to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development?

The IGF can play a more structured role in supporting implementation in three ways:

1. Implementation-oriented stocktaking grounded in evidence and learning

Rather than revisiting high-level principles, the IGF annual meeting could dedicate structured segments to tracking progress on specific WSIS Action Lines and other WSIS follow-up outcomes, GDC commitments, and SDG-linked digital targets.

This could include:

• Structured multistakeholder consultations on the evolving role and strengthening of the IGF itself, in line with the WSIS+20 outcome resolution inviting reflection on the Forum’s future
• Voluntary national and regional implementation updates
• Thematic implementation roundtables (e.g. AI risk governance; cyber resilience capacity-building; inclusive digital public infrastructure with safeguards)
• Consultations on the implementation roadmaps being developed by WSIS Action Line facilitators as part of the WSIS+20 follow-up process
• Mapping exercises that explicitly link IGF discussions and intersessional outputs to GDC follow-up mechanisms
  

Crucially, this should move beyond reporting toward shared learning — synthesising evidence about what works, where gaps remain, and how implementation approaches can evolve across contexts.

2. Strengthening the IGF–GDC interface and participatory legitimacy

As GDC follow-up mechanisms take shape, the IGF should be explicitly recognised as a venue for structured multistakeholder input into those processes.

This requires:

• Clear feedback loops between IGF outputs and intergovernmental negotiations
• Transparent pathways showing how Policy Network (PN) and Best Practice Forum (BPF) outputs inform UN review and implementation discussions
• Institutional coordination between the IGF Secretariat and relevant UN bodies
  

Legitimacy in digital governance is not conferred by consensus text alone. It is built through sustained, meaningful participation. A stronger IGF–GDC interface would ensure that multistakeholder expertise and lived experience shape implementation — not only norm articulation.

3. Supporting capacity, governance innovation and policy coherence

Many countries face structural constraints in implementing digital commitments due to capacity gaps, regulatory complexity and fragmented institutional landscapes.

The IGF can help by:

• Showcasing practical governance models, policy toolkits and implementation roadmaps
• Highlighting peer learning across regions and stakeholder groups
• Connecting national implementation challenges to global norm development
• Providing space to explore governance innovation (e.g. regulatory experimentation, new accountability mechanisms, participatory monitoring frameworks)
  

By explicitly addressing capacity and coherence, the IGF can help reduce fragmentation across digital governance processes and support more adaptive, evidence-informed policymaking.

—

Do you have any ideas to share about the overarching theme, thematic tracks, format and design of the IGF programme?

Overarching Theme Proposal: “From Commitments to Delivery: Strengthening Trust, Participation and Coherence in Global Digital Governance.”

This theme reflects the transition from principle articulation to implementation while emphasising the normative foundations of human rights and multistakeholder legitimacy.

Suggested Thematic Tracks

1. Implementation & Evidence for Inclusive Digital Policy
   • Metrics and evidence for rights-centred governance
   • Shared implementation roadmaps
2. Multistakeholder Legitimacy & Participation
   • Inclusive design, accountability and access
   • Civic space, voice and representation
3. Technology, Risk and Systemic Coherence
   • Responsible AI governance intersects with data, security and trust
   • Cross-domain resilience and risk mitigation
4. Institutional Innovation & Global Agendas
   • Linking IGF work with WSIS Action Lines, GDC follow-up, and SDGs
   • Policy coherence across forums

Design & Format Suggestions

• Action-oriented sessions with clear outcomes, follow-up commitments, and documented takeaways that feed directly into intersessional workstreams.
• Implementation labs and peer-learning hubs linking practical policy experiences with global dialogue.
• Cross-track bridges designed to bring domain silos into sustained conversation (e.g., AI x cybersecurity, DPI x rights).
• Structured feedback mechanisms to ensure that multistakeholder outputs are considered in formal global policy reviews.
• A dedicated multistakeholder dialogue on the evolving role and strengthening of the IGF, in line with the WSIS+20 outcome resolution inviting reflection on the Forum’s future.

By anchoring IGF 2026 around implementation, legitimacy and coherence, the community can strengthen its unique role as an inclusive multistakeholder space that not only articulates digital governance principles — but actively supports their delivery in practice.