Posted on

UN ITU 5G & Agenda 2030 SDGs

 

UN ITU 5G & Agenda 2030 SDGs | Photo Image Source

2021 | UN International Telecommunications Union (ITU) | Source

“The ‘Connect 2030 Agenda for Global Telecommunication/ICT Development’ focuses on how technological advances will contribute to accelerate the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.”  LINK

The International Telecommunication Union ( ITU ) is a specialized UN agency, that sets the global standard for 5G requirements.[1]

 

 

About ITU

“The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is the specialized United Nations agency for information and communication technologies (ICTs), driving innovation in ICTs together with 193 Member States and a membership of over 900 companies, universities, and international and regional organizations.

ITU is the intergovernmental body responsible for coordinating the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promoting international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, improving communication infrastructure in the developing world, and establishing the worldwide standards that foster seamless interconnection of a vast range of communications systems.”  LINK

 

Link To_List_ITU_UN_Members Directory – My ITU

 

[1] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/5g_sc_report_august_1.pdf   p.6

 


 

 

“ITU has three Sectors: Radiocommunication (ITU-R); Telecommunication Standardization (ITU-T); and Telecommunication Development (ITU-D).” Source

Source

 

 


 

Q: Why has it been difficult to stop wireless infrastructure deployments at the local and national levels?
A: Wireless infrastructure ( 4G-5G+) requirements are being guided by the UN International Telecommunications Union ( ITU ) to support UN Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. LINK

 

UN ITU Sets Global Standards for 5G

Did you know? The UN Agency “ITU” sets the global standard for 5G requirements

LINK

 

 


 

 

 

“In December 2012, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) held a treaty conference to revise its Telecommunication Regulations (WCIT). That conference exposed a rift between those Member States who wanted greater control over Internet Governance and those – such as the U.S. and Europe – committed to the Multistakeholder model.” P.3

 

Link To_FINAL-December-2014-News

 

 


 

Reference

 

NTIA DOC
Corporate governance of internet
ENERGY Commerce Internet Oversight NTIA

US Stewardship of ICANN

In 1998, the Clinton administration sought to privatize and internationalize the Domain Name System (DNS) with this directive in the White Paper:

“The President directed the Secretary of Commerce to privatize the Domain Name System in a way that increases competition and facilitates international participation in its management.”

“The US Government is committed to a transition that will allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management.”2

In the 17 years since, it’s been a long road from American invention to internationalized private- sector leadership by an entity the US established for the task: the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Three administrations and several Congresses have worked to help ICANN mature and protect the vision of private-sector leadership from growing pressure for control by governments, who saw the growth of the Internet and assumed that its governance required an inter-governmental solution.”

“China was not alone in its desire for the migration of ICANN and IANA functions to the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU).”

 

 


Transfer of IANA to global community Dept of State Smart Cities

“On September 27, a diverse group of stakeholders, including governments, industry representatives, UN organi- zations, technology associations, and NGOs, gathered in Geneva, Switzer- land at ITU Headquarters to share best practices for enabling the use of Infor- mation and Communications Technol- ogies (ICTs) for disaster risk mitigation and response.”

 


Audrey Plonk – Intel – IANA 2015

“STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES ON THE IANA TRANSITION.”

“Prior to joining Intel in 2008, I led the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) security policy work on critical information infrastructure protection and malware. In that role, I served as liaison to the Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation Telecommunications and Information Working Group, the International Telecommunication Union and the Internet Governance Forum. From 2003 to 2006, I worked as a consultant for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s National Cyber Security Division, primarily focusing on international security policy issues in their International Affairs Division.”

 


World Bank  ITU

“More recently, a new approach to revive the multi- lateral model arose in an attempt by the membership of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to update the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs) at the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai in 2012. Measures aimed at regulating privacy and free speech were introduced in a special codicil in the regulations. This resulted in a clear split between 89 countries that approved the new draft and 80 that maintained reservations (map 6.1).12 Although it was expected that these issues might have been taken up at the ITU Plenipotentiary in Busan, Republic of Korea, in 2014, they were not and remain unresolved.

A key point of contention for countries favoring a multilateral approach is the U.S. government’s over- sight of IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Author- ity).13 The MLM would like to see an IANA transition to an intergovernmental body, like the ITU. The MSM, especially the United States, insists on further autonomy of ICANN and IANA. In March 2014, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced a process to relinquish its oversight over certain technical functions performed by IANA to the multistakeholder community—in shorthand, the IANA transition, originally scheduled to be completed by September 2015.14 A key condition of the IANA transition is that oversight of the technical functions would not be ceded to a government or group of governments, but to the multistakeholder community.”