Search for Articles:
Journal:
Subject:
MOSP / Journal / Journal of International Economy and Global Governance

Journal Menu

Home
Aims & Scope
Editorial Board
For Authors
Ethics & Policies
APC & Subscription
Editorial Office

Journal Browser

Vol.2 (2025) Iss. 1 / 2
Vol.1 (2024) Iss. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8

Table of Contents

Abstract
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
License
Open Access
文章

Interpreting the Global Digital Compact: Charting a New Vision Towards a Multi-Stakeholder Governance Model

Qifan Jiang1,*, Yuhang Ma2  

1 Leiden Law School, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands; School of International Law, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, China
2 Leiden Law School, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
* Correspondence: Yuhang Ma, E-mail: mayuhang0308@163.com
 
J. Int. Eco. Glo. Gov., 2025, 2(1), 45-66; https://doi.org/10.12414/jiegg.250437
Received : 09 Nov 2024 / Revised : 16 Nov 2024 / Accepted : 29 Nov 2025 / Published : 25 Feb 2025
© The Author(s). Published by MOSP. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license.
Download
Cite
Abstract
 
The “Global Digital Compact” (GDC) published by the United Nations highlights that “multi-stakeholder” actors are the implementers of this compact, serving as a breakthrough for interpreting it. The multi-stakeholder governance model can effectively regulate the Internet; however, the roles played by various stakeholders differ significantly in practice, with governments and enterprises often dominating Internet governance while civil society remains in a disadvantaged position. The stakeholders referenced in GDC are not limited to governments and enterprises; civil society emerges as a third core stakeholder in the digital age, with its interests articulated as fundamental values of digital human rights. Based on this value order, the implementation of the multi-stakeholder governance model in GDC can be reflected in both horizontal and vertical interactions between the other two stakeholders: horizontal interactions aim to establish an international digital cooperation framework among governments through treaties and agreements, bridging the international digital divide between developed and developing countries, forming international standards for artificial intelligence governance, and promoting the sharing of technology and knowledge; vertical interactions aim to create a meta-regulatory relationship between governments and enterprises, achieving interaction and coordination between self-regulation and government regulation through risk assessment mechanisms and diverse accountability mechanisms.
 
Keywords: Global Digital Compact, Multi-Stakeholders, Digital Human Rights, Global Governance
 
Download the full text PDF for viewing and using it according to the license of this paper.

Funding

    None.

Conflicts of Interest:

    The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to report regarding the present study.

References

  1. 47 U. S. C.§223(a)(1)(B)(ii) (1994), 2, (223) (d).
  2. Assembly, G. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES70,1.
  3. Ayres, I & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate, Oxford University Press.
  4. Baran, P. (1964). On Distributed Communications Networks, 12 IEEE Transactions on Communications Systems 1,1-9.
  5. Baran, P. (1964). On Distributed Communications Networks, 12 IEEE Transactions on Communications Systems 1,1-9.
  6. Barlow, J. (2001) Tsinghua Legal Theory Review, (X. Li, & X. Li, Trans.) Tsinghua University Press.
  7. Berners.L.T., Cailliau, R., Luotonen, A., Henrik Frystyk, N.A., & Arthur Secret. (1994) The World-Wide Web, Communications of the ACM 37 (8), 76-82.
  8. Chapelle, B. (2009), Internet Governance: Infrastructure and Institutions, Oxford University Press, 256-270.
  9. Chapelle, B.D. (2009) Internet Governance: Infrastructure and Institutions, Oxford University Press
  10. Chen, R. (2022). Basic Theory of Corporate Compliance, Law Press.
  11. Council of Europe and European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, (Ed.) (2018) European Ethical Charter on the use of artificial intelligence in judicial systems and their environment, https://rm.coe.int/ethical-charter-en-for-publication-4-december-2018/16808f699c.
  12. DeNardis, L. (2014). The Global War for Internet Governance, Yale University Press, 8; 69; 66; 36; 223; 226-227.
  13. Dickens, C. (1859). A Tale of Two Cities.
  14. Digital Silk Road Accelerates World Modernization (Ed.) China Belt and Road Network, High-Quality Joint Construction of the Belt and Road Has Achieved Remarkable Results remarkable, in China.gov.cn, https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2022-01/25/content_5670280.htm.
  15. Digital Silk Road Accelerates World Modernization (Ed.) China Belt and Road Network, High-Quality Joint Construction of the Belt and Road Has Achieved Remarkable Results remarkable, in China.gov.cn, https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2022-01/25/content_5670280.htm.
  16. ECNL, Council of Europe Ad Hoc Committee on Artificial Intelligence (Ed.) (2021). Public consultation (survey) --ECNL Answering Guide, https://ecnl.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/CAHAI%20Survey_ECNL%20Answer%20Guide_0.pdf.
  17. Edwards, P. (1996). The Closed World: Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America, MIT Press.
  18. European Commission (Ed.) (2020) The European Data Strategy. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/862109/European_data_strategy_en.pdf
  19. European Commission, (Ed.) (2021). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1623335154975&uri=CELEX%3A52021PC0206
  20. Goldsmith, J & Wu, T. supra note 5, 37-38
  21. Goldsmith, J & Wu, T., supra note 5, 41.
  22. Goldsmith, J. & and Wu, T. supra note 5, 22.
  23. Goldsmith. J, & and Wu, T. (2000), supra note 5, (X. Wang, Trans.) Peking University Press.
  24. He, H. & Zhang, Y. (2023). Conflict of Interest and Mitigation in the Reasonable Use of Personal Health Information in the Digital Age: Taking ‘Design Protection’ as an Approach, Science & Technology and Law, (4), 48.
  25. ICANN. (Ed.) Bylaws for Internet Cooperation for Assigned Names and Numbers.  https://www.icann.org /resources/pages/governance /bylaws-en.
  26. Information Commissioner’s Office,Conducting Privacy Impact Assessments Code of Practice, (2017). Information Commissioner’s Office, UK.
  27. Johnson, D. & Post, D. (1996), Law and Borders: “The Rise of Law in Cyberspace”,48 Stanford Law Review,1367; Wu, S., T. Cyberspace Sovereignty, 10 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology,467
  28. Kahn, P, (2009). American Exceptionalism, Popular Sovereignty, and the Rule of Law, in Michael Ignatieff ed, American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, (198-222.). Princeton University Press.
  29. Kleinwächter, W. (2011), Editorial in MIND Co: laboratory Discussion Paper Series, 2.
  30. Liu, H. (2016). Domain Name System, Network Sovereignty and Internet Governance, Chinese and Foreign Law, 2, 527.
  31. Liu, H. (2016). Domain Name System, Network Sovereignty and Internet Governance, Chinese and Foreign Law2, 528.
  32. M．Kummer.Multis take holder Cooperation (Ed.): Reflections on the Emergence of a New Phraseology in International Cooperation. http://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2013 /05/multistakeholder-cooperation-reflectionsemergence-new-phraseology-international.
  33. M. Kummer.Multis take holder Cooperation9(Ed.): Reflections on the Emergence of a New Phraseology in International Cooperation. http://www.internetsociety.org /blog /2013 /05/multistakeholder-cooperation-reflectionsemergence-new-phraseology-international.
  34. Mathiason, J. (2009), Internet Governance: The New Frontier of Global Institute (pp. 70-96.) Routledge,
  35. Mathiason, J., (2009). Internet Governance: The New Frontier of Global Institute, Routledge, 70-96.
  36. Mueller,L.M. (2015). Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance, (Z., Chen. et al. Trans). Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.
  37. Mueller,L.M. (2015): Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance, (Z., Chen. et al. Trans). Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.
  38. OECD, Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence.
  39. Oever, N.T., Moriarty.,K. (Ed.) (2012.) The Tao of IETF: A Novice’s Guide to the Internet Engineering Task Force. https: / /www.ietf.org /about /participate /tao /
  40. Political Declaration at the Occasion of the UN’s 75th Anniversary (2020). https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N20/248/80/PDF/N2024880.pdf?OpenElement.
  41. Rachovitsa, A. &Johann, N. (Ed.) (2022) The Human Rights Implications of the Use of AI in the Digital Welfare State: Lessons Learned from the Dutch SyRI Case, Human Rights Law Review 22, 2. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac010.
  42. Somnstein, k. (1966). The Networked Republic: Democracy in the Age of the Internet (Huagn, W, Trans.). Shanghai People's Publishing House.
  43. Stevens, J. (1997). American Civil Liberty Union v. Reno, 521 U.S.844, 851.
  44. Szucs, A. (Ed.) (2021). NATO defense ministers adopt strategy on artificial intelligence, Anadolu Agency, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/nato-defense-ministers-adopt-strategy-on artificial-intelligence/2400087.
  45. The Global Partnership on AI. (Ed.) (2023). https://oecd.ai/en/gpai.
  46. The original Internet, the Arpanet, was born in the midst of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. Its original design concept was closely related to the political struggles and military struggles between sovereign states.
  47. UNDP (2023). The impact of digital technology on human rights in Europe and Central Asia: Trends and challenges related to data protection, artificial intelligence and other digital technology issues. Istanbul: United Nations Development Programme.
  48. UNDP (2023). The impact of digital technology on human rights in Europe and Central Asia: Trends and challenges related to data protection, artificial intelligence and other digital technology issues.
  49. UNESCO(Ed.) Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://en.unesco. org/artificial intelligence/ethics; UNICEF (Ed.) (2021). Policy guidance on AI for children 2.0, https://www.unicef. org/globalinsight/reports/policy-guidance-ai-children; UN Global Pulse (Ed.). Expert Group on Governance of Data and AI, https://www. unglobalpulse.org/policy/expert-group-on-governance-of-data-and-ai/; EU Reporter (Ed.) (2021). Distinguished leaders from Boston and Balkan regions to collaborate for Global Law on AI and Digital Rights, https://www.eureporter.co/world/us/2021/10/01/distinguished-leaders-from-boston-and-balkan-regions-to-collaborate-for-global-law-on-ai-and-digitalrights/
  50. UNICEF (Ed.) (2021). Policy guidance on AI for children 2.0. https://www.unicef. org/globalinsight/reports/policy-guidance-ai-children,
  51. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 11.
  52. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 19.
  53. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 12.
  54. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 12.
  55. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 11.
  56. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 19.
  57. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 14.
  58. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 14.
  59. United Nations. A Global Digital Compact-an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All. 14.
  60. Wang, J. (2017), Introduction to the Economics of Government Regulation: Basic Theory and Its Application in Government Regulation Practice, The Commercial Press.
  61. Xie, Z. & Zhang, J. (2023). The international community praises the Digital Silk Road, China Social Sciences Journal.
  62. Zhang, J. (2022) Research on a Designed Personal Information Protection Mechanism, Law Science, 3, 42
  63. Zhang, T. (2021), Metaregulation of ‘Protecting Data by Design’ in the Era of Big Data, Journal of Dalian University of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2, 86.
  64. Zhao, Q. (2023). Multi-Party Cooperation to Bridge the Global Digital Divide, China Social Sciences Journal 1.
  65. Zhao, X. (Ed.) The End of the Masquerade. Humanities and Social Sciences Network. http:// wen. org. en/modules/article/view, article. php/1249.
  66. Zou, J, (2016). Reconstruction of Global Internet Governance Models, China's Opportunities and Participation Paths, Journal of Nanjing Normal University, 3.
  67. Zou, J. (2016), Reconstruction of the Global Internet Governance Model, China's Opportunities and Participation Path, Journal of Nanjing Normal University. https: / /en.wikipedia.org /wiki /ICANN.  
© The Author(s). Published by MOSP. 
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license.

Jiang, Q.; Ma, Y. Interpreting the Global Digital Compact: Charting a New Vision Towards a Multi-Stakeholder Governance Model. Journal of International Economy and Global Governance 2025, 2 (1), 45-66. https://doi.org/10.12414/jiegg.250437.

Subscribe Your Manuscript
Branches
HanLin Group
澳科中文官网
Book Center
Patent Center
Services
For Authors
Book Builder
Projects
Young Mind
Beyond Expo.
About us
MOSP Team
MOAJ Team
Blog & News
Partnership
Careers
Contact
© 2021-2023 Macao Scientific Publishers ( Macao, P.R. China )
www.mospbs.com