Are you or your organisation thinking of endorsing the Global Digital Compact (GDC)? Has your organisation already endorsed it? If so, please think again, and make a valuable political statement by not endorsing it. Endorsing it gives validity to a flawed process and a deeply problematic document. If it only receives a few endorsements those behind it cannot claim legitimacy, despite it having been agreed by governments participating in the UN Secretary General’s Summit of the Future. Those behind the GDC state that it is a “roadmap for global digital cooperation to harness the immense potential of digital technology and close digital divides”. Put simply, as it is currently structured it cannot deliver on this (for some of the reasons why see Reflections on the Global Digital Compact, Why “we” (the people of the world) need to reject the Global Digital Compact, and Scientism, multistakeholderism and the Global Digital Compact). The endorsement process “calls on all stakeholders to engage in realizing an open, safe and secure digital future for all”. As it is currently worded, it will never deliver this.
Choosing not to endorse the GDC is a positive action that will save a huge amount of unnecessary time and effort – and thus money – that could better be spent on delivering effective digital futures in the interests of the many rather than the few. Here are six things to think about before you make a decision:
- Have you read it all? You cannot endorse the document unless you agree with it. I also wonder how many people in the 106 organisations that have already signed it have actually read the full document, and do indeed agree with its content? If you do not agree with all of it, how can you endorse it?
- Does the UN Secretariat have the capacity (both quantitatively and qualitatively) to manage the envisaged GDC process. Despite the planned dramatic expansion of the Office of the Tech Envoy, do you think there is capacity within the UN Secretariat to manage all of the endorsements and engage you actively in future processes and activities? Anyone who is aware of the time and effort that have already been spent by UN agencies in delivering previous global digital initiatives (and processes such as WSIS and the IGF) will know how complex and difficult this is. Do you have faith that the UN Secretariat can effectively deliver the required management of the GDC process? What indeed will this involve?
- Whose interests does the GDC really serve? Is it anything more than a vanity project for a few leaders within the UN Secretariat, and the powerful interests that they serve? Will it really deliver benefits in the interests of the world’s poorest and most marginalised? If you do not think so, you should not endorse it.
- Is your organisation merely signing it for appearance’s sake? Are you afraid that you might miss out on an opportunity? Is it just a chance to rebrand what you are already doing, and be seen to be supporting a “global” initiative that has the UN label behind it?
- Are you endorsing it primarily in your own interests? Are you doing this in the hope that there could be possible future advantages for your own organisation in doing so? Are you really committed to doing things differently so that digital technology can indeed be used by everyone in their own interests? That means everyone, not just the rich and powerful. Are you really going to change fundamentally what you are doing so that you work in the interests of those without power, without a voice, who are being enslaved by those driving the future of digital tech?
- How can you endorse the GDC if you do not yet know exactly what this means in terms of your future commitments? Apparently endorsing the GDC merely means that you endorse its vision and principles. Do you really endorse all of them? If not, can you endorse it? The endorsement protocol also states that “Organisations and associations can specify action areas where they are involved in and/or interested in contributing, regardless of whether they have endorsed the Compact”. Yet, this does not say what is meant by “contributing”. What do you really want to contribute, and how will you do so?
Please think twice before endorsing the GDC. Do you really think that it provides a sufficiently rigorous or comprehensive framework for crafting a future for the design and use of digital tech that will serve the interests of the world’s poorest and most marginalised people and communities. If you care deeply about these issues, can you really endorse it?
Tim Unwin's Blog 
Thanks, as always for a detailed and thoughtful post. I share your doubts about the value of the GDC, although I am less convinced by your first and last arguments. (It ought to be possible to conditionally endorse a program, and it might be unreasonable to want all the details upfront about how this is going to be done.)
Would there be any point in developing an alternate document, one that addresses the shortcoming of this one? (It could be a variant of the GDC, with the changes highlighted.) I am curious as to whether it is possible. I suspect that these shortcomings are inherent in anything done like this, at a global scale.
Only the powerful have the resources to put something like this together, and it will consequently be skewed to their world view, even with the best intent. Even documents that are genuinely widely consultative of necessity end up as messy compromises if they are to accommodate different views.
I spent four years in the UN system and saw first-hand the powerful pushing their agendas and closing down others, while giving a good public display of inclusivity and consultation. I know it’s broken, but the UN also attracts many idealists who really want to change the world. I’m still puzzling over how it can be harnessed for good.
I’m particularly interested in exploring the kinds of power that the majority have. Numbers? Buying power? Labour power? Voting power (in democracies)? There has to be some lever that changes the balance of power, and some way to press it.
Thanks very much for this thoughtful response. I completely take the point about having a “conditional” option, but I had not read the GDC in that way. It could indeed have been helpful if one could have been able to agree or disagree with each paragraph or principle. I also agree very much that there are some good people within the UN system who do indeed want to mnake the world a better place (I do make this explicit in much of my writing). Thanks again.