Accelerating ICT Security
Capacity-Building
Take Aways from the Global Roundtableon ICT Security Capacity-Building
G I A C O M O P E R S I PA O L I·

SAMUELE DOMINIONI·AAMNA RAFIQ·

L E N KA F I L I P O V ÁAcknowledgments
Support from UNIDIR core funders provides the foundation for all of the Institute’s activities. This
study is part of UNIDIR’s Security and Technology Programme cyber workstream, which is funded by
the Governments of Australia, Canada, Czechia, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway,
Switzerland and by Microsoft.

About UNIDIRThe United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) is a voluntarily funded, autonomous
institute within the United Nations. One of the few policy institutes worldwide focusing on disarmament,
UNIDIR generates knowledge and promotes dialogue and action on disarmament and security. Basedin Geneva, UNIDIR assists the international community to develop the practical, innovative ideas
needed to find solutions to critical security problems.

Note
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning thelegal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of
its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in the publication are the sole responsibility of the individual authors. They do not necessary reflect the views or opinions of the United Nations, UNIDIR, its
staff members or sponsors.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

2Authors
This report was produced by the UNIDIR Security and Technology Programme.

Giacomo Persi Paoli
Head, Security and Technology
Dr. Giacomo Persi Paoli is the Head of the Security and Technology Programme at UNIDIR. His
expertise spans the science and technology domain with emphasis on the implications of emerging
technologies for security and defence. Before joining UNIDIR, Giacomo was Associate Director at
RAND Europe where he led the defence and security science, technology and innovation portfolio
as well as RAND’s Centre for Futures and Foresight Studies. He holds a PhD in Economics from the
University of Rome, Italy, and a Master’s degree in political science from the University of Pisa, Italy.

Samuele Dominioni
Researcher, Security and Technology Programme
Dr. Samuele Dominioni is a researcher in the Security and Technology Programme at UNIDIR. Before
joining UNIDIR, he held research positions in both academic and think tank settings. He holds a PhD ininternational relations and political history from Sciences Po, France, and the IMT School for Advanced
Studies, Italy.

Aamna Rafiq
Researcher, Security and Technology Programme
Aamna Rafiq is a Researcher (Cyber) within the Security and Technology Programme at UNIDIR. She
has expertise in securitization of cyberthreats at national, regional and international levels. She is alsointerested in the military applications of emerging technologies specially ICTs and their integration into
warfare strategies and doctrines.

Lenka Filipová
Coordinator, Security and Technology Programme
Lenka is a Coordinator with the Security & Technology Programme at UNIDIR. Prior to this role, Lenka
held various positions in different international organizations and government.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

3

Contents
1.		

The Road to the Global Roundtable on ICT Security Capacity-Building

6

2.		

Format and Structure of the Roundtable

10

3.		

Highlights from the Plenary Session and Signature Panel

10

4.		

Highlights from the Breakout Groups

13

5.		

Addressing Barriers to ICT Capacity-Building

15

6.		

Conclusion

17

Appendix A.

List of Registered Speakers for the Signature Panel

18

Appendix B.

List of Registered Speakers for the Matchmaking Session

18

Appendix C.

Speakers and Guiding Questions for Breakout Groups

19

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

4Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,
Peace and security in the physical world demand new approaches to peaceand security in the digital world. Your Roundtable highlights this vital link.
Unlocking the benefits of digital technology means closing the digital divide,and ensuring its many benefits are shared by all people. But closing thedigital divide also means closing the glaring gaps in the security of information and communication technology.
Such gaps place countries and, most importantly, people at risk. More thanever, global security depends on the security of digital technology.
We need to ensure that States fully implement the agreed norms of responsible behaviour in their use of digital technology. This is the only way toprotect not only people, but the infrastructure they depend on. And we needto support developing countries to increase their digital security capacity.
Digital security is a critical part of the New Agenda for Peace.
We need strong frameworks for collaboration on threats to global peace andsecurity, in line with international law, human rights, and the UN Charter.
This Roundtable is a key opportunity for countries to share their ideas, experiences, and commitment to this vital issue.
Thank you all for being part of this essential work.

Secretary-General’s video message to the Global Roundtable on Information
and Communications Technologies Security Capacity-Building, 10 May 2024

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

51. The Road to the Global Roundtableon ICT Security Capacity-Building
The Global Roundtable on ICT Security

Framework for responsible State behaviour inCapacity-Building held in New York on 10

cyberspace, including voluntary norms, prin-

May 2024 was the first event organized underciples and rules, international law and confi-

United Nations auspices fully dedicated to thisdence-building measures.

important issue. It was organized by the Chairof the Open-ended Working Group on securityof and in the use of information and communications technologies 2021–2025 (OEWG)
as requested by Member States in the second

With the consensus report of 2019–2021
Open-ended Working Group on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international

Annual Progress Report of the OEWG.1

security, Member States achieved an important

While this event was the first of its kind, capacity-

ciples for ICT capacity-building in relation tobuilding in the field of information and commu-

process and purpose, partnerships and people

nication technology (ICT) has been on the multi-(see Box 1).3

milestone by agreeing on a set guiding prin-lateral agenda pertaining to international peaceand security in the ICT domain for more thana decade. The consensus report of the 2010
Group of Governmental Experts on advancing
responsible State behavior in cyberspacenoted that “Capacity-building is of vital importance to achieve success in ensuring global ICT
security, to assist developing countries in theirefforts to enhance the security of their criticalnational information infrastructure, and to
bridge the current divide in ICT security”.2 Since
then, capacity-building has been progressively recognized as a key enabler underpinning
the implementation of, and adherence to, the1

Report of the Open-ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of Information and Communications Technologies 2021–
2025, A/78/265, para. 48, 1 August 2023, https://documents.un.org/symbol-explorer?s=A/78/265&i=A/78/265_8759712.
2

Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in theContext of International Security, A/65/201, para. 17, 30 July 2010, https://documents.un.org/symbol-explorer?s=A/65/201&i=A/65/201_5194277.
3

Final Substantive Report of the Open-ended Working Group on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, A/AC.290/2021/CRP.2, para. 56, 10 March 2021, https://front.un-arm.org/
wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Final-report-A-AC.290-2021-CRP.2.pdf.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

6

BOX 1.

Principles for capacity-building in relation to State use of ICTs in thecontext of international security
Source: Open-ended Working Group on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security, Final Substantive Report, para. 56

Process and Purpose•

Capacity-building should be a sustainable process, comprising specific activities by and for different
actors.

•Specific activities should have a clear purpose and be results focused, while supporting the sharedobjective of an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful ICT environment.

•

Capacity-building activities should be evidence-based, politically neutral, transparent, accountable, and without conditions.

•

Capacity-building should be undertaken with full respect for the principle of State sovereignty.

•

Access to relevant technologies may need to be facilitated.

Partnerships•

Capacity-building should be based on mutual trust, demand-driven, correspond to nationally identified needs and priorities, and be undertaken in full recognition of national ownership. Partners incapacity-building participate voluntarily.

•

As capacity-building activities should be tailored to specific needs and contexts, all parties areactive partners with shared but differentiated responsibilities, including to collaborate in the design,
execution and monitoring and evaluation of capacity-building activities.

•

The confidentiality of national policies and plans should be protected and respected by all partners.

People•Capacity-building should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, be gender sensitive andinclusive, universal and non-discriminatory.

•

The confidentiality of sensitive information should be ensured.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

7The ongoing 2021–2025 OEWG has put anwith responsibilities divided among Member

even stronger emphasis on capacity-building,States, the Chair of the OEWG, and the United

adopting a total of 12 recommendations in its

Nations Secretariat (see Box 2).

first and second Annual Progress Reports,
4

5

BOX 2.

Summary of recommended next steps on capacity-building producedby the 2021–2025 OEWG
Source: Open-ended Working Group on security of and in the use of information and communications
technologies, First Annual Progress Report, para. 17, August 2022
In the first Annual Progress Report, States were encouraged to:•Continue exchanging views at the OEWG on capacity-building on security in the use of ICT.

•Engage in focused discussions on a number of issues including funding specifically for capacitybuilding efforts, better coordination and integration of existing initiatives, best practices and lessons
learned and gender dimensions of ICT security.

•

Survey their capacity needs including through the National Survey of Implementation or other tools.

•

Continue to support capacity-building programmes, including in collaboration, where appropriate,with regional and subregional organizations and other interested stakeholders, including businesses, non-governmental organizations and academia.

Source: Open-ended Working Group on security of and in the use of information and communications
technologies, Second Annual Progress Report, paras. 44–51, August 2023
In the second Annual Progress Report, States were encouraged to:•Continue exchanging views at the OEWG on capacity-building related to security in the use of ICT,and continue focused discussions on how the principles of capacity-building as adopted in the 2021
OEWG report can be further mainstreamed within capacity-building initiatives on security in the useof ICT.

•

Continue to discuss the proposal for a Global Cyber Security Cooperation Portal as a ‘one-stop
shop’ tool for States, developed under the auspices of the United Nations and in synergy withexisting portals as appropriate.

4

Report of the Open-ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of Information and Communications Technologies
2021–2025, A/77/275, 8 August 2022, https://documents.un.org/symbol-explorer?s=A/77/275&i=A/77/275_0643976.

5

Report of the Open-ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of Information and Communications Technologies
2021–2025, A/78/265, 1 August 2023, https://documents.un.org/symbol-explorer?s=A/78/265&i=A/78/265_8759712.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

8•Support the United Nations Secretariat in updating the Cyber Diplomacy e-learning course for
diplomats.

•Develop and share voluntary checklists and other tools to assist States in mainstreaming thecapacity-building principles from the 2021 OEWG report into capacity-building initiatives related to
ICT security, as well as to develop and share tools that would assist States in incorporating a gender
perspective into such capacity-building efforts.

•

Continue to support capacity-building programmes, including in collaboration, where appropriate,with regional and subregional organizations and other interested stakeholders, including businesses, non-governmental organizations and academia.

The OEWG Chair was requested to:•Engage with relevant United Nations entities and international organizations offering capacitybuilding programmes on security in the use of ICT and encourage them to align their capacitybuilding programmes, where relevant and appropriate and in accordance with their respective
mandates, to further support States in their implementation of the framework for responsible State
behaviour in the use of ICT and efforts to build an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful ICT
environment.

•

Convene a dedicated Global Roundtable meeting on ICT security capacity-building during the intersessional period to allow for an exchange of information and best practices.

The United Nations Secretariat was requested to:•

Conduct a ‘mapping exercise’, in consultation with relevant entities, in order to survey the landscapeof capacity-building programmes and initiatives within and outside of the United Nations and at the
global and regional levels, including by seeking the views of Member States.

•

Update the Cyber Diplomacy e-learning course for diplomats, with the aim of producing an updated
course in 2024.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

92. Format and Structure of theRoundtable
The Global Roundtable on ICT Security

and good practices related to ICT security

Capacity-Building was organized in the format

capacity-building. The breakout groups providedof an in-person, high-level meeting to provide

an opportunity for more in-depth discussions

an action-oriented platform for Member States

on concrete and action-oriented measuresand the stakeholder communities. It broughtthat States, international organizations andtogether more than 100 delegations, of whichstakeholders should take to improve capacity-

53 took the floor, and 56 stakeholders. It wasbuilding measures.

6organized as a full-day event alternating plenary
sessions and breakout groups with a dedicated‘matchmaking’sessionfor

ICT

security

capacity-building providers and implementers

The following sections in this report provide
a high-level summary of the key themes thatemerged from the event. The report is not

to offer an overview of their work.7

meant to be an exhaustive recount of all individ-

The plenary session offered a platform for

consult the event recordings8 and the reposito-

Member States to share their views, experiences

ry of statements.9

ual interventions, for which we invite readers to

3. Highlights from the Plenary
Session and Signature Panel
After the opening remarks by Ambassa-

distinguished speakers that shared perspec-

dor Burhan Gafoor, Permanent Representa-

tives on the importance of ICT security andtive of Singapore to the United Nations andrelated capacity-building efforts. Interventions

Chair of the OEWG, and a video message fromwere made by:Secretary-General of the United Nations
António Guterres, the Global Roundtable•

continued with high-level statements fromAmbassador Collen Kelapile, Chef deCabinet, who delivered remarks on behalf of

6

52 national delegations, plus the European Union. See Appendix A.

7

See Appendix B for the list of organizations that took the floor during the matchmaking session.

8

Please note that the recordings of the event are accessible via UN Web TV at the following links—Part 1: https://webtv.un.org/
en/asset/k18/k18of23xwc ; Part 2: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k10/k100ujzq24.
9

All statements delivered during the plenary sessions of the Global Roundtable can accessed at the following link: https://meetings.unoda.org/meeting/57871/statements?f%5B0%5D=segment_statements_%3A2024%20inter-sessional.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

10the President of the General Assembly, Mr.

achievement of the Sustainable Development

Dennis Francis;

Goals is undisputed, on the other many critical

Ms. Doreen Bogdan-Martin, Secretary-Gen-vulnerabilities persist at the global level:

10

•

eral,
Union;•

International

Telecommunication

11

Mr. Achim Steiner, Administrator, United
Nations Development Programme;12 and•

Ms. Josephine Teo, Minister for Communications and Information, Singapore.

13

1. Cyber insecurity now figures among the
top 10 most severe global risks over the
short and long term, according to the World
Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risks
Report and in 2024 alone the projected costof cybercrime to the global economy is over

Following this high-level opening segment, theGlobal Roundtable continue with a Signature
Panel titled “Building Cyber Resilience for Sustainable Development by Bridging the Global
Capacity Gap”. During this session, moderated
by UNIDIR Director Dr. Robin Geiss (morning
session) and Ambassador Burhan Gafoor(afternoon session), national delegations wereinvited to share their views on barriers faced
at the national level in building the ICT security
capacities, avenues to overcome or mitigate
such barriers and lessons learned in capacitybuilding to be shared and applied internationally.
Two key messages emerged from the day,both equally supported by hard evidence: amessage of urgency and a message of hope.
The sense of urgency is the product of several
worrying trends, both quantitative and qualitative. If on one side the recognition of theimportance of digital transformation for the

9 trillion US dollars.
2. The ICT domain is playing an increasingly relevant role in the context of armed
conflicts, posing new challenges to civilians
and critical infrastructure.
3. The threat landscape is continuously
evolving: as digital transformation and connectivity increase for the great benefit ofsocieties, so does the attack surface thatmalicious actors can exploit; technologicaladvancements, including but not limited toartificial intelligence, are increasing the sophistication, scale and speed of traditional
cyberattacks (e.g. ransomware) and havethe potential to unlock new attack vectors,
posing significant risks to national security,organizational integrity and the global
economy.
4. There is a global shortage of nearly 3.5
million ICT professionals and a significant gender gap with only 25% of ICT

10Link to statement: https://www.un.org/pga/78/2024/05/10/pga-remarks-at-the-global-roundtable-on-ict-security-capacity-building-as-delivered-by-chef-de-cabinet-ambassador-collen-kelapile/.
11

Link to statement: https://docs-library.unoda.org/Open-Ended_Working_Group_on_Information_and_Communication_
Technologies_-_(2021)/10052024_Global_Roundtable_on_ICT_Security_Capacity_Building_OEWG_ITU_SG_FINAL.pdf .
12

Link to statement: https://docs-library.unoda.org/Open-Ended_Working_Group_on_Information_and_Communication_
Technologies_-_(2021)/240510_Remarks_by_UNDP_Administrator-_Global_Roundtable_on_ICT_Security_Capacity_
FINAL.pdf.
13

Link to statement: https://docs-library.unoda.org/Open-Ended_Working_Group_on_Information_and_Communication_Technologies_-_(2021)/Opening_Remarks_by_Minister_Josephine_Teo_at_UN_Roundtable_on_ICT_Security_
Capacity_Building__10_May_.pdf.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

11professionals being women. Beyond the

key component to enhance national, regional

community of ICT professionals, there

and global cyber resilience in the face ofis a persistent issue related to the lackrapidly evolving ICT threats.

of digital literacy, including awareness ofcyber threats and basic principles of cyber
hygiene at the individual and organizational level.
5. Despite the general acknowledgement of
the growing importance of ICT security
as a global issue and as a key enabler for
economic and social development, digital
divide continues to be a significant barrier
for many developing countries and 60% of
the least developed countries currently lacka national cybersecurity strategy.
GlobalRoundtable

the global roundtable also offered important
insights into the ‘how’ and the ‘who’. In
relation to the ‘how’, the importance of thecapacity-building principles agreed under
United Nations auspices (see Box 1 above) was
reiterated, with particular emphasis on issues
pertaining to human rights and gender as wellas on characteristics such as inclusivity, universality and non-discrimination.
In relation to the ‘who’, interventions during

also

the Global Roundtable recognized the impor-delivered a clear message of hope based ontance of the United Nations, of Regional and(a) the consensus on the gravity of the problem

other intergovernmental initiatives, and of theand the need to act, (b) the strong evidence

multi-stakeholder community.

However,theBeyond the ‘what’ of ICT capacity-building,presented to illustrate the scale and scopeof current and past initiatives related to ICTStates recognized the important role played

security capacity-building, and (c) the generalby all stakeholders, including industry, the sci-

commitment to do more and work coopera-

entific and academic communities, and civil

tively, within and outside the United Nations, tosociety and NGOs in informing, shaping andaddress ICT security capacity gaps.

delivering capacity-building initiatives. Bothdonors and recipients of capacity-building pro-

Two key areas of intervention were frequent-grammes can benefit from the meaningful en-

ly mentioned. The first is education and up-

gagement of a wide range of stakeholders

skilling with a view to creating a workforce

that can provide support across all stages of athat possesses the range of skills required

programme life cycle, from design to delivery

to effectively mitigate the risks pertaining toand evaluation.

ICT security domestically and internationally, including the technical, legal and diplomat-

Manyinterventions

also

recognized

theic. Several examples of initiatives conductedessential role played by many regional andat the national, bilateral, regional or global level

subregional organizations in the design andwere described by speakers.

delivery of capacity-building initiatives that arecontextualized, demand-driven and tailored to

The second area of intervention is the provision

local needs and capacities. Regional organi-of technical/specialized assistance and or-

zations often act as the intermediary between

ganizational/institutional support, including

donors, recipients and implementers, adding

but not limited to incident response. The com-

the knowledge of local context and needs to thebination of training, organizational support,

subject matter expertise brought by project im-technical expertise and—where relevant andplementers.

feasible—technology transfer, emerged as a

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

12

Lastly, there was large support for the role ofMore specifically, interventions highlighted thethe United Nations as fundamental player

pivotal role played by the current OEWG inin the area of ICT security capacity-building.

further advancing the multilateral agenda on

In general terms, there was the recognition

ICT security, including on capacity-building,that the United Nations plays a vital role as aand the need for these discussions to

global platform for Member States to engage

continue in an institutionalized, permanent

in productive discussion on ICT security,andincluding capacity-building, and for its ability

United Nations auspices that will follow after

to convene the multi-stakeholder community.

the current OEWG concludes its mandate.

action-oriented

mechanism

under

4. Highlights from the Breakout
GroupsFollowing the opening plenary session andof operational and technical capacities, thethe briefings by the stakeholders, the Global

growth of the talent pipeline and the estab-

Roundtableforlishment of new partnerships across relevant

Member States to engage in more focused

stakeholders. Both groups started with somediscussions through the participation in two

framing remarks by a small group of panellists

breakout groups. In these sessions, discus-

followed by a moderated discussion with thesions sought to unpack the five pillars of thewhole group. The list of panellists and guiding

foundational cyber capabilities identified inquestions can be consulted in appendix C.

providedanopportunity

the UNIDIR report Unpacking Cyber Capacity
Needs: Part I – Mapping the Cyber Foundational Capabilities: policies, processes, people
and skills, partnerships, and technology.14
The first group focused on strengthening governance policies and processes, in particular through the development of national cyberstrategies and other regulatory instruments aswell as through the creation or improvementof dedicated structures and process to enable
the implementations of such governance instruments. The second group focused on developing talent, partnerships and technologies in particular through the development

An important note on terminology was madeat the start of the discussions to clarify how
the terms capability and capacity relate toeach other. As working definitions, capability refers to the ability to perform a given task,
while capacity refers to the ability to sustain
and maintain such capability over time. In thecontext of ICT security, both are important andrequired.
In relation to national cybersecurity strategies, there was agreement that such strategies are not only important, but an essential

14

Unpacking Cyber Capacity-Building Needs: Part I. Mapping the Foundational Cyber Capabilities, UNIDIR, July 2023, https://unidir.org/publication/unpacking-cyber-capacity-building-needs-part-i-mapping-the-foundational-cyber-capabilities/.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

13prerequisite for any State interested in devel-

This approach is useful in illustrating how

oping a safe and secure digital ecosystem.

States that have yet to develop their first cyber-

Without a national cyber strategy, States may

security strategy should not feel overwhelmedlack a structured response to cyber threats,by the complexity of the issue: not everythingleading to disjointed and inefficient handling of

has to be dealt with at once, but it is essential tocyber incidents.

take the first step.

National cybersecurity strategies serve as aThis is supported also by the second char-clear declaration of a State’s commitment toacteristic of strategies: that they should becybersecurity, helping to mobilize necessary

continuously evolving. This is particularly

funding and other resources, and ensuring

relevant given the rapid evolution of the tech-

the sustainability of cybersecurity initiatives

nology and the associated threat landscapebeyond traditional political cycles. Additionally,

which requires a continuous reassessment

strategies lay the groundwork for digital trans-of the national approach as showcased byformation—a critical factor for the social anda recurring trend in many States where theeconomic development of any country.

‘shelf-life’ of national cybersecurity strate-

Two important characteristics were highlighted
in relation to strategies: they should be progres-gies has been progressively reduced from five
years to only two or three years.

sive and continuously evolving. The first point

Developing, and regularly updating, a nationalbuilds on the assumption that strategies can becybersecurity strategy and other regulato-

broken down into three generations, each withry instruments is a necessary but not suffi-a different priority and focus. The first genera-

cient condition to enable a safe and securetion of strategies primarily focuses on raising

digital ecosystem. Discussions in the breakout

awareness about the significance of cyberse-

groups emphasized the critical importancecurity and putting in place basic national-levelof the practical elements of implementa-

policies, processes and structures, marking

tion and the need for a step-by-step approach

the initial steps towards national cybersecurity

to avoid setting expectations that are notreadiness. As such, first generation strategiesaligned with resources, which can itself be atend to be inward facing, prioritizing domestic

risk if not managed properly. Strategies aloneinterventions. The second generation of strat-

are not sufficient if they are not designed withegies builds on the first and adds the coopera-

implementation in mind and matched withtion element, both internal with the clarification

adequate resources. Thinking about imple-of roles and responsibilities of different national

mentation means thinking about the establish-

stakeholders (e.g. incident response teams,

ment of structures and processes to oversee

various ministries, private sector) as well assuch implementation, the development of

external, covering the issue of international co-human, organizational and technical ca-

operation. The third generation builds on thepacities to implement such plans in partner-

previous two to further advance the cybersecu-

ship with a wide range of relevant governmen-

rity discourse by recognizing the transverse

tal and non-governmental stakeholders as

nature of cybersecurity, acknowledging that

required. All of these elements are required to

its impact extends across all sectors of society

improve the prevention and mitigation of, andand government. Such holistic view supports

the response to, cyber incidents, ultimately in-a more integrated and strategic approach tocreasing national cyber resilience.

cybersecurity.
A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

14

Sustained access to, and retention of, skillsorganizational capacity together with part-and talent remain a critical challenge acrossnerships are essential for a wide range ofthe globe, particularly for governments that

purposes: from supporting operational capabil-face strong competition from the private sector.

ities related to incident response and cyber law

As such, it is important for governments toenforcement, including the sharing of threat in-both cultivate a talent pipeline in a new genera-

telligence and preservation of digital evidence,tion of civil servants and to offer upskilling andto ensuring the cybersecurity of critical infra-

professional development opportunities to thestructure and securing supply chains.

current workforce. This could be achieved, forexample, through cyber apprenticeship programmes, dedicated courses, and certifications. Regional and subregional organizations already play an important role in making
such opportunities available to States that do
not have the national resources to set up andFinally, the breakout session highlighted thecritical importance of multi-stakeholder engagement across all capability areas: fromstrategy development, to incident response,
efficient and structured engagement withcivil society organizations, the private sector,

sustain a national training programme.

academia and—where relevant—regional or-

Within the wider context of supporting sustain-

an essential component for enhancing nationalable development through digital transforma-cyber resilience.

ganizations, such engagement was flagged astion, participants agreed that technical and

5. Addressing Barriers
Capacity-Building

to

ICT

Over the course of the day, participants high-

United Nations must play both through thelighted a number of barriers to building ICT

current OEWG and even more through thesecurity capacities and provided an overview

future action-oriented, permanent mechanism,of current practices aimed at mitigating, atin the area of ICT security capacity-building.

least in part, such barriers. Table 1 below

In addition, the Global Roundtable also high-provides a summary of the main barriers iden-

lighted the essential role played by regionaltified matched with mitigation strategies thatorganizations and national-led initiatives

emerged from the interventions during the day,which, by leveraging the wealth of knowledge

both in plenary and in the breakout sessions.

and expertise available across the multi-

Beyond individual barriers and mitigation strategies, it is important to highlight how partic-

stakeholder community have been able toachieve remarkable results in recent years.

ipants recognized the critical role that the

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

15TA B L E 1 .

Summary of Identified Barriers to ICT Security Capacity-Building andPossible Mitigation Strategies
BARRIERS

Lack of political support at thenational level due to limited
awareness of the issue and/or
competing policy priorities

Limited access to, or retention of,talent in the public sector

Lack of organizational structures
and/or coordination amongst them

Affordability of technical solutions

Limited alignment between needs
and resources due to lack ofawareness, lack of coordinationand duplication of efforts

M I T I G AT I O N S T R AT E G I E S F O R C O N S I D E R AT I O N•

Identify and cultivate ‘cyber champions’ within political leadership who can
advocate for the inclusion of ICT security on the political agenda and drive
policy development.

•

Work with the multi-stakeholder community, particularly civil society andacademia, to raise the overall level of awareness.

•

Work with the multi-stakeholder community, particularly with critical infrastructure owners/operators and providers of critical services, to create strong
business cases illustrating the importance of ICT security for national security
and economic prosperity.

•

Expand the talent pool through the creation of dedicated education programmes at all levels with a particular focus on addressing the significant
gender disparity that currently affects the cyber workforce.

•

Implement upskilling and professional development programmes for thecurrent workforce, leveraging regional and subregional organizations asnecessary and appropriate.

•

Implement efficient public–private partnerships for the provision of specialized
capabilities.

•

Develop a national cybersecurity strategy and implementation plan that
establish a clear distribution of roles and responsibilities across existing structures/entities and/or create new ones.

•

Leverage the expertise of the multi-stakeholder community to mitigate some of
the inefficiencies as appropriate (e.g., to support better coordination).

•

Leverage regional and multilateral forums to exchange views on goodpractices.

•

Leverage international cooperation and assistance opportunities.

•

Implement efficient public–private partnerships for the provision of technology
and/or services.

•

Leverage regional and subregional synergies for the harmonization of requirements and the design of shared solutions.

•

Leverage regional and multilateral forums for exchanging information on needs
and available resources.

•

Use existing (or create as required) digital tools, platforms and portals toincrease situational awareness of current supply and demand of capacitybuilding programmes.

•

Leverage the United Nations, and in particular the future permanentmechanism, as a ‘clearing house’ for ICT security capacity-building to increaseawareness and coordination among donors, recipients and implementers.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

16

6. Conclusion
The first United Nations Global Roundtable on

The Global Roundtable gave a strong input to

ICT security capacity-building offered a uniquethe work of the OEWG both in relation to how

platform for Member States, intergovernmen-

the group can carry forward the ICT security

tal organizations and representatives from

capacity-building agenda in its mandate as

the multi-stakeholder community to meet andwell as how capacity-building will feature in

exchange views on barriers and solutions tothe scope, structure, content and modalities

building a more resilient global ICT ecosystemof the future permanent mechanism, which thewhere States, societies and people can thrive in

OEWG will determine.

a safe and secure digital environment.

While being its first iteration, the Global Round-

While the roundtable highlighted how muchtable on ICT security capacity-building repre-

is already happening thanks to national orsented an important step for the international

regional programmes or multi-stakeholder

community’s commitment to enhance cyber

initiatives such as the Accra Call for Cyber

resilience at the global level. In a year charac-

Resilient Development,

it also highlight-

terized by many multilateral initiatives outside

ed the urgent need to do more, including byof the First Committee of the General Assemblyenhancing synergies to advance the interna-that will have an impact on the digital domaintional community’s work on capacity-building

such as the Global Digital Compact16 and thein a coherent and sustainable way. The

Pact for the Future,17 the theme of ICT security

roundtable also highlighted that in light of acapacity-building is likely to establish itself as acontinuously evolving threat landscape, ICT

cross-cutting issue that is of critical importancesecurity itself needs to evolve and as a result

for security and development alike. As such,capacity-building should be considered as a

Member States should leverage the OEWG tocontinuous need that will persist across gen-further advance this important issue and workerations and require strategic partnerships

together to address one of the greatest chal-and resource optimization to ensure success-lenges of our times, and of the times to come.

15

ful implementation. It is in this context that theUnited Nations can reaffirm its centrality byproviding a platform that facilitates dialogue
and exchange of good practices, and enhancecoordination and coherence across different
layers of intervention (national, regional andmultilateral).

15

See https://gc3b.org/the-accra-call-for-cyber-resilient-development/.

16

See https://www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact.

17

See https://www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

17APPENDIX A.

List of Registered Speakers for the Signature Panel
States only, in alphabetical order
Albania

Ecuador

LatviaSpain

Argentina

El Salvador

Malaysia

Sri Lanka

Belgium

European Union

MexicoSwedenBrazilFranceMoroccoSwitzerland

Burkina Faso

Germany

Pakistan

Syrian Arab Republic

Cambodia

GuatemalaParaguay

ThailandCanadaIndia

Philippines

Ukraine

China

Indonesia

PolandUnited Arab Emirates

Côte d’Ivoire

Ireland

Portugal

United Kingdom

Cuba

Islamic Republic of Iran

Qatar

United States

Czechia

IsraelRussian Federation

Uruguay

Denmark

Italy

Saudi Arabia

Djibouti

JordanSierra Leone

Dominican Republic

Kingdom of the Netherlands

South Africa

APPENDIX B.

List of Registered Speakers for the Matchmaking Session
Organizations only, in alphabetical order
BAE Systems

ICT4Peace Foundation

CipherIndependent Diplomat

CREST

Institute for Security and Technology

Department of States, United States

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

Digital Agenda for Tanzania Initiative

INTERPOL

DiploFoundation

Japan International Corporation Agency

Ensign Infosecurity

MITRE

EU CyberNet

S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies

European Union Institute for Security Studies

SafePC Solutions

Federal Foreign Office, Germany

Temple University Institute for Law, Innovation & Technology (iLIT)

Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST)

Third Eye Legal

Global Cyber Alliance

UNIDIR

Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFCE)

Write Pilot

Hikanotes Consultancy Limited (Hikanotes Cyber Program)

Youth for Privacy

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

18

APPENDIX C.

Speakers and Guiding Questions for Breakout Groups
Breakout Group 1: Strengthening Governance Policies and Processes
Speakers
Ms. Kerry Ann Barrett, Cybersecurity Programme Manager at the OAS; Mr. Chris Painter, President of
the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise; and Mr. Eng. Abdulrahman Bin Ali Al Farahid Al Malki, Presidentof the National Cyber Security Agency of Qatar.
Moderator
Dr. Giacomo Persi Paoli, Head, Security & Technology Programme, UNIDIR
Rapporteur
Ms. Lenka Filipová, Coordinator, Security & Technology Programme, UNIDIR
Guiding Questions•

Why it is important to develop national cyber strategies and other regulatory instruments?

•

What are the risks associated with not having such instruments or dedicated structures in place for
their implementation?

•

Which policies, regulations, and structures are crucial for implementing various elements of the
Framework of Responsible State behaviour (the Framework) and why these elements are essential?

•

Which aspects of the Framework are the most challenging to implement in terms of policies and regulations?

•

What resources do Member States require to effectively strengthen these policies, regulations, andstructures?

•

What are the potential roles of civil society, the private sector, and academia in these efforts?

•

What are good practices to strengthen policies and regulations necessary for the Framework’s
implementation, as well as effective methods for establishing or improving national structures tosupport this implementation?

Breakout Group 2: Developing Technology, Talent and Partnerships
Speakers
Ms. Lee Pei Ling, Head of Strategy, Interpol, Singapore; Mr. Hitoshi Tojima, Chief Digital Officer, Japan
International Cooperation Agency; Ms. Timea Suto, Global Digital Policy Lead, International Chamberof Commerce (ICC).
Moderator
Dr. Samuele Dominioni, Researcher, Security & Technology Programme, UNIDIRA C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

19Rapporteur
Ms. Aamna Rafiq, Researcher, Security & Technology Programme, UNIDIR
Guiding Questions•

What technological capabilities and partnerships may be crucial for the implementation of multiple
elements of the Framework and why?

•

What are the challenges of developing technology, talents, and partnerships in relation to what is
outlined by the Framework?

•

What resources would Member States require to effectively develop these capabilities? And what
could be the role of the private sector, civil society, and academia?

•

What are good practices in developing technical and operational capabilities?

•

What are good practices for growing and retaining talent?

•

What are good practices for establishing effective partnerships?

•

What technology/talents/partnerships should a Member State employ/establish to implement thefollowing norm (as an example)?
»

Norm G States should take appropriate measures to protect their critical infrastructure from
ICT threats, taking into account General Assembly resolution 58/199.

A C C E L E R AT I N G I C T S E C U R I T Y C A PA C I T Y- B U I L D I N G

20

@unidir/unidir/un_disarmresearch/unidirgeneva/unidir

Palais des Nations
1211 Geneva, Switzerland© UNIDIR, 2024
W W W. U N I D I R . O R G