Search Climate Insights Directory

The author argues that existing rights to information and expression are insufficient to address the quality and reliability of information in the digital age. He proposes a 'right to non-disinformation' to protect citizens from systematic deception that hinders the exercise of other rights. Using Bolivia as a case study, the text warns against the 'wrong solution' of criminalizing 'lies' or 'fake news' through legislation, which risks censorship. Instead, it suggests integrating this new right into human rights frameworks to complement non-interventionist strategies like fact-checking and media literacy.

The statement asserts that climate change is a justice issue, as historically wealthy industrialized nations caused the crisis while disadvantaged communities in the Global South suffer disproportionately. It argues that 'communication and information deficits'—such as limited media access and a lack of public interest journalism—prevent the knowledge of affected communities from reaching policymakers. To address this, the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) proposes several measures, including promoting ICT access for Indigenous groups and supporting the sharing of traditional ecological knowledge, which it will present at COP30.

The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) warns that AI infrastructure is following an extractivist economic model, citing environmental damage and lack of local benefit. It specifically highlights a planned US$25 billion OpenAI data centre in Argentina as an example of this trend. WACC advocates for national oversight, the protection of Indigenous rights, and a moratorium on new data centres until water and energy risks are mitigated.

The document analyzes the impact of generative AI on the spread of misinformation in India, highlighting a 550% increase in deepfake-related cybercrimes since 2019. It details the weaponization of AI for political campaigns and gendered disinformation, while evaluating the effectiveness of digital media literacy programs and AI detection tools in building community resilience.

The paper examines the impact of generative AI on journalism and politics in Australia and New Zealand, highlighting a gap between technological adoption and regulatory oversight. It advocates for a shift from piecemeal digital literacy efforts to mandatory curricula and the adoption of AI labelling standards, drawing on OSINT transparency models and industry-academic collaborations to ensure information integrity.

The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) highlights a critical financing gap in achieving global digital justice and inclusion. Following the WSIS+20 High Level Event, the document notes that rising debt in developing countries and cuts in international development finance hinder sustainable digital development. WACC proposes four strategies to address this: taxing digital corporations, linking digital governance with development finance frameworks, increasing national public investment, and mobilizing diverse funding sources from philanthropic and private sectors.

The document reports on the Internet Governance Forum 2025, highlighting a conflict between the United States' preference for deregulated, company-led AI development and calls from other participants for a rights-based, inclusive approach that addresses the digital divide and biases affecting the Global South.

The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) calls for a fundamental reassessment of the international development model, which it describes as a colonial project. Amidst declining foreign aid from the United States and Europe, WACC advocates for a 'post-aid world' centered on communication justice, democratic data ownership, and the prioritization of national actors and Indigenous knowledge over Northern agendas.

The Global Digital Justice Forum, a coalition of civil society organizations from the Global Majority, argues that the 'Broligarchy'—Silicon Valley firms and US government leadership—has weaponized data and AI, leading to human rights abuses, ecological injustice, and the exclusion of 2.5 billion people from digital benefits. The coalition demands a transition to 'global digital constitutionalism' where digital infrastructures are treated as commons rather than commodities, urging governments to curb corporate monopolies and protect the rights of nature.

The Global Forum for Digital Justice argues that the internet has transitioned from a space of creativity to a tool for surveillance and oppression, driven by the profit-seeking motives of Silicon Valley companies and US foreign policy. The statement highlights that 2.5 billion people remain digitally excluded, exacerbating global inequalities. It calls for a 'new global digital constitutionalism' to replace corporate greed and state control with digital commons and policies that limit monopolies and protect ecological justice.

The Global Forum for Digital Justice, a coalition of Global South civil society organizations, argues that the 'Broligarchy'—Silicon Valley companies aligned with the US government—threatens international norms, human rights, and ecological justice. The statement claims that digital spaces have shifted from tools of creativity to instruments of surveillance and oppression, with AI and data being used as weapons that contribute to labor precariousness and climate catastrophes. It calls for a transition to digital infrastructures as common goods rather than commodities, urging international solidarity for a democratic digital order, government action to limit corporate monopolies, and global civic mobilization.

A cross-community statement from civil society, the private sector, and the technical community calling for the alignment of the Global Digital Compact (GDC) with the WSIS process to avoid fragmentation in digital governance. The authors advocate for the IGF to be established as a permanent forum with sustainable resources to maintain its role as a primary multistakeholder platform for digital cooperation.

The Global Forum for Digital Justice argues that the 'Broligarchy'—a combination of Silicon Valley companies and US government leadership—threatens the rules-based international system, human rights, and ecological justice. The statement claims that digital spaces have shifted from tools of creativity to instruments of surveillance and violence, driven by corporate profit and US foreign policy. It highlights that 2.5 billion people remain digitally excluded, exacerbating global inequalities. The coalition demands a transition to digital infrastructures as 'commons' and calls for a new global digital constitutionalism, policies to restrict corporate monopolies, and worldwide civic action to protect the planet and empower people.

The statement highlights the conflict between the growing water demands of Big Tech data centres and the global crisis of water scarcity, noting that AI training is driving further demand. It criticizes the UN Pact for the Future for ignoring the water footprint of digitalization and suggests taxing Big Tech to fund equitable water management.

The document argues that communication is a fundamental human right essential for dignity and justice, rather than just a tool for progress. It critiques the current digital ecosystem for being dominated by Global North monopolies and surveillance capitalism, which marginalizes voices in the Global South. Through various case studies and reports, it advocates for a 'people-first digital ecosystem' based on public digital infrastructure, multilingual accessibility, and ethical AI governance to ensure that digital transformation expands rather than narrows human rights.

The report critiques the current digital ecosystem as a form of 'data colonialism' driven by profit-seeking corporations from the Global North. It traces the history of the struggle for communication control from the 1970s NWICO debates to the current era of AI and Big Tech. The authors propose a 'Communication Rights' (CRs) framework that moves beyond simple freedom of expression to include collective rights, public ownership of digital utilities, and the protection of data sovereignty to ensure a more equitable and diverse digital future.

The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) warns that the US administration's purge of DEI-related terminology is extending globally, as international organizations and charities modify their language to secure funding or avoid political pressure. While noting the erasure of terms like 'accessible' and 'vulnerable populations' from government materials, the document suggests this is an opportunity for communicators to move beyond tokenistic jargon toward more descriptive, empowering language that demonstrates the real impact of solidarity.

The World Association for Christian Communication highlights the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Platform for Action and supports a statement by the Global Alliance on Media and Gender (GAMAG) warning that gender equality progress is being reversed. The document calls for the protection of women-led civil society resources, the defense of media freedom for women journalists, and resistance against the erasure of gender equality language from public discourse.

The Haarlem Declaration 2024 is a commitment by a global community of digital media makers to deploy AI technologies in service of the public good. It outlines six core pillars: transparency and explainability, ethical data practices, information integrity, the minimization of bias and harm, the prioritization of people over technology, and the mitigation of AI's environmental impact. The document calls for human accountability, the protection of intellectual property, and the implementation of fact-checking protocols to counter misinformation. It further proposes practical actions such as the creation of an 'Ethical AI Checklist' and the production of evidence-backed research on AI's implications for media workers and information integrity.

The COP29 Declaration on Green Digital Action outlines a framework to leverage digital innovation for greenhouse gas reduction and climate resilience while addressing the digital sector's own energy and water consumption, e-waste, and the digital divide.