Pohle, Julia; San aniello, Mau o
A icle — Published Ve sion
F om mul is akeholde ism o digi al so e eign y: Towa d a
new discu si e o de in in e ne go e nance?
Policy & In e ne
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Pohle, Julia; San aniello, Mau o (2024) : F om mul is akeholde ism o digi al
so e eign y: Towa d a new discu si e o de in in e ne go e nance?, Policy & In e ne , ISSN
1944-2866, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 16, Iss. 4, pp. 672-691,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/poi3.426
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/313538.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Recei ed: 17 Ap il 2024
|
Accep ed: 18 Augus 2024
DOI: 10.1002/poi3.426
RESEARCH ARTICLE
F om mul is akeholde ism o digi al
so e eign y: Towa d a new discu si e o de
in in e ne go e nance?
Julia Pohle
1
|Mau o San aniello
2
1
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin,
Ge many
2
Depa men o Managemen & Inno a ion
Sys ems (DISA‐MIS), Uni e si y o Sale no,
Sale no, I aly
Co espondence
Mau o San aniello, Depa men o
Managemen & Inno a ion Sys ems (DISA-
MIS), Uni e si y o Sale no, Sale no, I aly.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
Funding in o ma ion
I alian Minis y o Uni e si y and Resea ch,
G an /Awa d Numbe : G an PRIN
2022KTTSBC; Uni ed Na ions Uni e si y
Ins i u e on Compa a i e Regional In eg a ion
S udies
Abs ac
Since he ea ly 2000s, he mul is akeholde go e n-
ance app oach has been he e e ence model o
ansna ional in e ne go e nance, eaching a
beyond he o iginal field o echnical coo dina ion and
s anda d‐se ing. Bu o e he las decade many
coun ies, including democ acies suppo i e o mul-
is akeholde ism, ha e adop ed measu es o
s eng hen hei digi al so e eign y. The eby, hey
ha e been ad ancing discou ses and p ac ices ha
ein o ce s a e powe wi h ega d o he digi al and
a e o en a odds wi h he mul is akeholde model.
This pape analyzes he eme ging dialec ic be ween
mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance and digi al
so e eign y by seeking o unde s and how he pu sui
o digi al so e eign y is inc easingly challenging he
hegemony o he mul is akeholde discou se in
in e ne go e nance. To his pu pose, i eassesses
he his o ical de elopmen o powe s uggles o e
he in e ne h ough he analy ical lenses o he dis-
cou se coali ion amewo k. A e econs uc ing how
he mul is akeholde discou se has eme ged and
ins i u ionalized in he in e ne go e nance a ena, he
pape e aces he expansion o he digi al so e -
eign y discou se, ega ding bo h he ac o s p omo ing
i and he na a i es a ached o i . I also iden ifies
key mo i a ions behind his discou se. Finally, he
pape discusses whe he he digi al so e eign y dis-
cou se is eme ging as a new discu si e o de in he
in e ne go e nance field and d aws a en ion o
Policy In e ne . 2024;16:672–691.672
|
wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/poi3
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion‐NonComme cial‐NoDe i s License, which
pe mi s use and dis ibu ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed, he use is non‐comme cial and no
modifica ions o adap a ions a e made.
© 2024 The Au ho (s). Policy & In e ne published by Wiley Pe iodicals LLC on behal o Policy S udies O ganiza ion.
condi ions ha could ei he suppo o weaken i s
eme gence.
KEYWORDS
digi al policy, digi al so e eign y, discou se coali ion, in e ne
go e nance, mul is akeholde ism
INTRODUCTION
In Oc obe 2019, he Ge man Fede al Chancello Angela Me kel opened he In e ne
Go e nance Fo um (IGF) in Be lin wi h a speech ha su p ised many in he audience.
Hos ed by Ge many, he IGF 2019 was he 14 h ins ance o his annual mee ing, c ea ed by
he Uni ed Na ions as a mul is akeholde discussion o um o all issues pe aining o he
managemen and coo dina ion o he in e ne , as well as i s usages and se ices. Me kel
emphasized he impo ance o mul is akeholde ism by s a ing ha “all o us”—meaning ci il
socie y, business, he scien ific communi y, as well as all go e nmen s—needed o wo k
oge he o shape he in e ne 's u u e, and wa ned o he isks ela ed o “na ional in e es s”
in e e ing wi h he ee and open in e ne . Bu she also s essed he impo ance o e aining
digi al so e eign y (Me kel, 2019), a e m ha a he ime had only s a ed o s uc u e he
o ficial communica ion o he Eu opean Union (EU) and he Ge man go e nmen . Wi h his
speech, no only did Me kel build a su p ising b idge be ween he p ese a ion o mul i-
s akeholde p ocesses in global in e ne go e nance on he one hand and he pu sui o
digi al so e eign y on he o he —and hus be ween wo discou ses ha appea almos
diame ically opposed—bu she also acknowledged ha he concep o digi al so e eign y is
i sel con es ed and ha di e en go e nmen s may a ach e y di e en ideas o i :
Bu i may be ha we all ha e come o unde s and some hing di e en by ha ,
e en hough we a e using he same e m. As I unde s and i , digi al so e eign y
does no mean p o ec ionism, o ha s a e au ho i ies say wha in o ma ion can
be dissemina ed—censo ship, in o he wo ds; a he , i desc ibes he abili y bo h
o indi iduals and o socie y o shape he digi al ans o ma ion in a sel ‐
de e mined way. (Me kel, 2019)
The quo e clea ly shows Me kel's awa eness o he isks and ensions inhe en in he
eme ging digi al so e eign y discou se, mos p ominen ly ha , by adhe ing o his new
discou se, Ge many would c ea e an unwilling alliance wi h au ho i a ian coun ies who ha e
long ough he dominance o mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance p ocesses.
This a icle analyzes his poli ical dialec ic be ween mul is akeholde ism and digi al
so e eign y. I s main objec i e is o unde s and whe he and how he pu sui o digi al
so e eign y is inc easingly challenging he hegemony o na a i es ela ed o he mul i-
s akeholde app oach in global in e ne go e nance. The la e app oach, which ound in he
IGF one o i s mos p ominen implemen a ions, has been he e e ence model o ans-
na ional in e ne go e nance p ocesses since he ea ly 2000s. Mul is akeholde ism he eby
e e s o a se ‐up in which di e en g oups o s a e and nons a e ac o s come oge he o
discuss and find consensus on issues ha a e usually c oss‐bo de and whose coo dina ion
appea s o go beyond he esponsibili y o es ablished mul ila e al ins i u ions. Bu simila o
digi al so e eign y, he mul is akeholde discou se is cha ac e ized by a ce ain openness
and agueness, which allows di e en ac o s o a ach di e en na a i es and ideas o i .
Thus, mul is akeholde ism se es as “an imagina y ha p o ides meaning and egula i y o
POLICY & INTERNET
|
673
a agmen ed, diso de ly wo ld”(Ho mann, 2016, p. 30) and, in his unc ion, has de eloped
in o an almos un ouchable man a o pa icipan s o global in e ne go e nance p ocesses.
Ye , o e he las decade an inc easing numbe o policy‐make s, including om democ a ic
go e nmen s suppo i e o mul is akeholde ism, ha e adop ed measu es and plans o
s eng hen hei digi al so e eign y. The eby, hey ha e been ad ancing discou ses and
p ac ices ha ein o ce s a e powe wi h ega d o he digi al and a e o en a odds wi h he
mul is akeholde model.
To unde s and how digi al so e eign y e o s a e challenging he mul is akeholde dis-
cu si e o de , he a icle fi s illus a es he concep ual amewo k o he s udy, which d aws
upon an idea ional app oach o he s udy o ansna ional policy‐making. F om his pe -
spec i e, bo h mul is akeholde ism and digi al so e eign y a e concei ed o as pe o ma i e
policy discou ses, each one u e ed by a specific g oup o ac o s, p omo ing a defined se o
in e es s and p ac ices, and elying on a dis inc i e ensemble o ideas and na a i es abou
how o go e n he digi al sphe e. D awing on he exis ing esea ch li e a u e on in e ne
go e nance and digi al policy, he a icle hen econs uc s how mul is akeholde ism
eme ged and gained he s a us o a dominan policy discou se in he in e ne go e nance
a ena, and how i became ins i u ionalized o e ime. I u he e aces how he digi al
so e eign y discou se expanded, bo h in e ms o he ac o s p omo ing i and o i s scope,
and analyzes he common mo i a ions ha con ibu ed o he s uc u a ion o he digi al
so e eign y discou se wo ldwide. Finally, he pape add esses whe he he digi al so e -
eign y discou se is eme ging as a new discu si e o de in he in e ne go e nance field, and
d aws a en ion o condi ions ha could ei he suppo o weaken he eme gence o a digi al
so e eign y discu si e o de as an al e na i e o mul is akeholde ism.
ORDERING THROUGH DISCOURSE: AN IDEATIONAL
APPROACH TO POLICY‐MAKING
O e he pas decades, academic in e es in he ole o ideas, na a i es, and discou ses in
in e na ional poli ics and policy s udies has been g owing s eadily. Ra he han aming
policy‐making in a neo‐posi i is epis emology and desc ibing i as a alue‐ ee echnical
p ocess, idea ional app oaches o policy‐making sha e a cons uc i is unde s anding o
meaning‐making in poli ics. Policy‐make s cons uc a ce ain idea o eali y by using wo ds
o desc ibe and con ex ualize phenomena. By placing hese phenomena in ela ionships o
each o he , hey c ea e and a ibu e meaning o he a ious aspec s ha a e pa o a
pa icula discou se. This means ha idea ional app oaches commonly ake a ela ionalis ,
con ex ual, and, e y o en, his o ical pe spec i e o he c ea ion o meaning in poli ics as
hey belie e ha discou ses influencing poli ics can only be cons ued, unde s ood, and
in e p e ed in hei ela ion o o he s and wi hin a pa icula con ex (Howa h &
To fing, 2005, p. 14). Fu he mo e, idea ional pe spec i es on policy a e based on he
unde s anding ha discou ses a e being p oduc i e and ep oduc i e o wha is defined by
he discou ses hemsel es. A pa icula discou se p oduces a ce ain wo ld iew by defining
wha is pe cei ed as eali y o u h; i he eby excludes o he , al e na i e in e p e a ions. In
e u n, s abilized in o ficial policy ex s and h ough p ac ical implemen a ion, he p i ileged
wo ld iew acili a es he p oduc ion o meanings, which a e in line wi h he ini ial discou se,
and hus ep oduces i . F om such a pe spec i e, a discou se is a se o ules abou wha
can and canno be said (Gaspe & Ap ho pe, 1996, p. 4).
Policy discou se analysis also acknowledges he ole o ac o s and hei in e es s as well
as he ins i u ions in which hey in e ac . Discou ses do no simply appea , hey a e always
p oposed and p omo ed by ac o s who migh o migh no e ec i ely use hem o ad ance
hei in e es s. A he same ime, poli ical and economic in e es s a e no unswayable
674
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
cha ac e is ics o policy ac o s bu necessa ily a eflec ion o mo e undamen al belie s and
ideas. Thus, by unde s anding policy discou se as he ou come o join p oduc ions o
meanings among a ious policy ac o s, i s analysis canno neglec he in e play o ideas,
in e es s, and ma e ial poli ical economy as well as hei impac on he ac o s in ol ed in he
c ea ion o policy discou se (Schmid , 2012, p. 91). Mo eo e , in e ac ions among policy
ac o s do no ake place in a acuum, a he hey a e influenced by o mal and in o mal
ins i u ions. They p o ide he con ex in which policy‐making akes place and de e mine
he deg ee o openness ha di e en ac o s display owa ds ce ain so s o policy ideas
(Jones, 2009, p. 13). Hence, ins i u ions cons ain and fil e policy discou ses since e e y
new idea, concep , o na a i e needs o be ailo ed o hese ins i u ions. Bu hey also
enable and acili a e he in oduc ion o a discou se since hey p o ide he concep ual o
cons i u ional ame o ac o s o ad ance, exchange, and adop new ideas and na a i es.
Among he au ho s who ha e de eloped his idea ional pe spec i e on policy‐making in o
a concep ual and me hodological app oach, his pape p ima ily builds on he wo k o
Maa en Haje who adap ed he Foucauldian concep o “o de o discou se” o he s udy o
public policy‐making and combines he analysis o discou se wi h a ocus on he ac o s and
he ins i u ions in ol ed in he policy p ocesses. D awing on his amewo k, we unde s and a
policy discou se o be a “specific ensemble o ideas, concep s, and ca ego iza ions ha a e
p oduced, ep oduced, and ans o med in a pa icula se o p ac ices and h ough which
meaning is gi en o physical and social eali ies”(Haje , 1995, p. 44). To connec he ( e‐)
p oduc ion o discou ses o he ac o s p omo ing hem, we iden i y “discou se coali ions,”
meaning a g oup o policy ac o s who sha e ideas o e ex ended pe iods o ime and who,
hanks o hei ha ing joined o ces, a e able o con ince o he poli ical ac o s, and e en-
ually he public, o he necessi y and app op iacy o a ce ain idea (Haje , 1993). The
pa icula i y o a discou se coali ion is ha ac o s do no necessa ily need o ag ee on
e e y hing o o coo dina e hei ac ions o build one. Nei he do hey need o sha e he same
alues o in e es s. Ins ead, by employing he same na a i es and p ac ices, hese ac o s
con ibu e—delibe a ely o unknowingly— o he eme gence, ep oduc ion, and asse i e-
ness o a common discou se (Haje , 1993).
In addi ion, Haje 's amewo k allows us o desc ibe he influence ha policy discou ses ha e
beyond a limi ed g oup o ac o s. I a discou se coali ion success ully p omo es a pa icula
discou se on a la ge scale, i “s a s o domina e he way a socie y concep ualizes he wo ld.”In
hiscase,we aceap ocesso “discou se s uc u a ion”(Haje , 1993,p.46).Fu he ,when his
discou se becomes e en mo e dominan , i can “solidi y in o an ins i u ion, some imes as
o ganiza ional p ac ices, some imes as adi ional ways o easoning”(Haje , 1993,p.46).In ha
case, we a e wi nessing a p ocess o “discou se ins i u ionaliza ion,”which has e en la ge
epe cussions o he ep oduc ion o he policy discou se and i s unde lying belie s. Thus,
ollowing Foucaul , Haje also s esses he ac ha , when a dominan discou se eaches a
ce ain le el o ins i u ionaliza ion, i s a s wo king as an o de ing de ice:
Discou ses imply p ohibi ions since hey make i impossible o aise ce ain
ques ions o a gue ce ain cases; hey imply exclusiona y sys ems because hey
only au ho ize ce ain people o pa icipa e in a discou se; hey come wi h dis-
cu si e o ms o in e nal discipline h ough which a discu si e o de is main-
ained; and finally he e a e also ce ain ules ega ding he condi ions unde
which a discou se can be d awn upon. (Haje , 1995,p. 49)
I is his pa icula e ec ha we mean by discu si e o de . Bu he concep o discu si e
o de should no be unde s ood as a s a ic one. Ra he , discu si e o de s a e bo h he
(always uns able) ou comes o discu si e s uggles, and he cogni i e spaces wi hin which
di e en discou se coali ions keep on figh ing o e meanings and defini ions.
POLICY & INTERNET
|
675
S udying he influence o pa icula discou ses and how hey de eloped in o o de ing
de ices ha s uc u e policy p ocesses, shape ins i u ions, and define powe dynamics in
he in e ne go e nance field has a long schola ly adi ion. The nex sec ions build on he
exis ing esea ch, including he empi ical da a, heo y, and analysis de eloped in his b anch
o s udies o ou line he his o ical modali ies h ough which he mul is akeholde go e nance
discou se, and mo e ecen ly he digi al so e eign y discou se, ha e been s uc u ed and
ins i u ionalized, wi h he la e now challenging he o me in i s unc ion o an o de ing
de ice.
MULTISTAKEHOLDERISM AS A DISCURSIVE ORDER IN
GLOBAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE
In wha was hen he newly‐eme ging policy field o global in e ne go e nance, he mul i-
s akeholde discou se a ose in he ea ly 2000s as a comp omise be ween wo main dis-
cou se coali ions ha we e con on ing each o he in a deba e o e he con ol o he in-
e ne 's Domain Name Sys em (DNS). The issues a s ake we e he managemen and
dis ibu ion o he in e ne 's esou ces ha ensu e on a echnical le el he smoo h unc-
ioning o he ne wo k, such as domain names, In e ne P o ocol (IP) add esses, and he oo
se e sys em.
The fi s discou se coali ion was composed o he US go e nmen , he US p i a e sec o ,
and he echnical communi y o compu e scien is s and enginee s ha had con ibu ed o
he de elopmen o he ea ly in e ne . This coali ion p omo ed a discou se based on a mix o
libe a ian and neolibe al na a i es, ad ancing and suppo ing he ideas o p i a e sel ‐
egula ion and p i a e‐led in e ne de elopmen (Chenou, 2014, p. 207). This fi s coali ion
was, in u n, al eady he ou come o a p e ious discu si e s uggle ha had un olded du ing
he 1990s and is impo an o unde s anding how hese ac o s' discou se ela ing o sel ‐
egula ion was ins i u ionalized in in e ne go e nance and con inues o s uc u e he policy
field o his day. A i s co e, his discou se p esen s a s o y o success, un olded along wo
main na a i es con ibu ed by wo di e en g oups o ac o s. The fi s na a i e, mainly
p omo ed by he US go e nmen , was abou he o igin o his success and old he s o y o a
ne wo k buil and popula ized by p i a e ac o s, a ne wo k whose as de elopmen was
acili a ed by ma ke mechanisms and loose go e nmen con ol. Acco dingly, he ac o s
behind his na a i e a gued ha he in e ne 's adminis a ion needed o be en us ed o
p i a e ac o s, wi h he US go e nmen playing an o e sigh ole o na ional secu i y pu -
poses only (Goldsmi h & Wu, 2006). The o he na a i e, mainly exp essed by he echnical
communi y, desc ibed he ul ima e des iny o he in e ne , ha is, i s una oidable uni e -
sali y, he insepa able and inalienable alue o in e connec ion, and he i esis ibili y o he
ee flow o in o ma ion (Ca pen e , 1996). Because o hese p esumed cha ac e is ics, his
na a i e claimed ha he in e ne would equi e he c ea ion o a new ansna ional sys em
o go e nance, which had o be based on a se o apoli ical policy p inciples like hose ha
had been de eloped by he echnical communi y and syn hesized in he amous mo o: “We
ejec : kings, p esiden s, and o ing. We belie e in: ough consensus and unning code”
(Cla k, 1992).
These wo na a i es ha complemen ed each o he in he sel ‐go e nance discou se,
sha ed an excep ionalis pe spec i e on he in e ne and “cybe space,”meaning he social
space ha was eme ging on op o his in as uc u e. As a digi al, ansna ional, and de-
cen alized ne wo king echnology, he in e ne —acco ding o his belie —would anscend
places and na ional bo de s. Consequen ly, i had o be conside ed as a new kind o i ual
space, sepa a ed om he na u al ealm and om he geog aphy o wo ld poli ics; as such, i
had o be i econcilable wi h he idea o s a e‐based e i o ial so e eign y. This cybe ‐
676
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
excep ionalis belie in he uniqueness o he in e ne was hea ily ma ked by a p agma ic
b and o libe a ianism ha had al eady se ed as a majo ideological influence on i s
echnical de elopmen (Wu, 2010). Based on a s ong dis us o es ablished poli ical
decision‐making p ocesses and ins i u ions, he co e o cybe ‐libe a ian con ic ions was
ha exis ing poli ical s uc u es would become obsole e wi h he expansion o digi al ne -
wo ks. F om his pe spec i e, go e nmen s, as symbols o s a e powe , had no place in he
new i ual space because hey could no exe cise hei au ho i y he e (Ba low, 1996). The
excep ionalis ideas complemen ed he neolibe al ideology o he US go e nmen o he
ime: while i ejec ed he idea o an in o mal echnical communi y unning he in e ne
independen ly o bo h s a e and business au ho i ies, he Clin on‐Go e adminis a ion em-
b aced cybe ‐excep ionalism as a way o legi imize he c ea ion o a new, ad hoc go e n-
ance sys em o he in e ne . They also used i o jus i y he exclusion o in e go e nmen al
mechanisms and a enas ha had been p e iously es ablished o he coo dina ion o o he
ansna ional communica ion ne wo ks such as o eleg aph, elephone, and sa elli es. In
1998, he US go e nmen and he communi y o in e ne echnicians ins i u ionalized hei
sel ‐go e nance discou se by c ea ing a nonp ofi co po a ion based in Cali o nia, he
In e ne Co po a ion o Assigned Names and Numbe s (ICANN), which was cha ged wi h
he adminis a ion o he DNS (Depa men o Comme ce DOC, 1998).
As soon as i was se up, ICANN and i s ole o in e ne go e nance s a ed o be
challenged by a new discou se coali ion, which opposed he idea o sel ‐ egula ion. In la ge
pa , his coali ion was made up o na ional go e nmen s (led by he BRICS coun ies, i.e.,
B azil, Russia, India, China, and Sou h A ica), in e na ional o ganiza ions, such as he
In e na ional Telecommunica ion Union (ITU), and in an ini ial phase also he EU. These
ac o s, which ha e been labeled by schola s as so e eign is s (Flonk e al., 2020;
Muelle , 2010), sha ed an in e na ionalis discou se based on no ma i e na a i es. Unlike
he on ological na a i es o he sel ‐go e nance discou se abou he o igins, na u e, and
des iny o he in e ne , he in e na ionalis na a i es ocused on i s deon ology and poli ical
s a us. Acco dingly, mos o hese na a i es emphasized he need o an in e go e nmen al
managemen o he DNS, which had o be designed o p o ide a mo e legi ima e egime and
a be e ep esen a ion o global in e es s in he go e nance o a ne wo k ha had sp ead
well beyond he Uni ed S a es. In addi ion, he in e na ionalis discou se coali ion also as-
sembled ac o s who we e no explici ly aiming a an in e go e nmen al solu ion o he
managemen o he DNS, bu opposed an in e ne go e nance o de oo s ongly influenced
by echnical and comme cial conce ns. De eloping coun ies, o example, sha ed some
na a i es o he in e na ionalis discou se o ad oca e o inc eased in e na ional espon-
sibili y in p o iding de elopmen al aid o b idge he digi al di ide, suppo economic de el-
opmen , and p e en a echnology‐d i en exace ba ion o exis ing his o ical dispa i ies. A
small g oup o ci il socie y associa ions also suppo ed pa s o he in e na ionalis discou se
o s ess he need o he democ a iza ion o in e ne go e nance and o he p o ec ion o
uni e sal human igh s.
The s uggle be ween he sel ‐ egula ion coali ion and he in e na ionalis discou se
coali ions c ys allized in o he UN‐hos ed Wo ld Summi on he In o ma ion Socie y (WSIS)
in he ea ly 2000s. Du ing WSIS, he sel ‐go e nance discou se coali ion ad anced he
dys opian na a i e o a h ea ening UN akeo e o he in e ne and a consequen o e ‐
egula ion o digi al inno a ion (Muelle , 2010, p. 75; Thum a , 2022). The in e na ionalis
discou se coali ion, ins ead, na a ed he u opian u u e o a “new coope a ion model”
(Eu opean Commission, 2005) based on mul ila e al ag eemen s and ha would espec he
“so e eign igh s o coun ies”and “ he so e eign equali y o all S a es”(B azil, 2003; Saudi
A abia, 2003), able o g an a ai and jus edis ibu ion o in e ne esou ces
(Bangladesh, 2003; Cuba, 2003) as well as a democ a iza ion o in e ne go e nance (ALAI
e al., 2022). F om his discu si e con on a ion and he powe s uggle be ween coali ions,
POLICY & INTERNET
|
677
he mul is akeholde app oach eme ged as a comp omise ha would allow he a ious
ac o s o de elop a common unde s anding o he go e nance p oblems hey we e acing,
and a he same ime con inue o s uggle o hei defini ions and meanings. A e ha ing
eme ged abou a decade ea lie , he idea o mul is akeholde ism had gained popula i y as
an app oach o b idge s a e and nons a e pa icipa ion in ansna ional policy domains
hanks o se e al UN summi s (Ho mann, 2016, p. 31). P omising a way o de elop long‐
las ing, albei nonbinding ules and s anda ds in a consensual manne , he mul is akeholde
discou se in he eme ging in e ne go e nance field was g ounded on a p agma ic ag ee-
men be ween he opposing wo coali ions, as well as on a widely‐sha ed belie . The
ag eemen consis ed in he sepa a ion be ween wo go e nance laye s: On he one hand,
he day‐ o‐day ope a ions ha keep he in e ne unning and ha should be en us ed o
businesses and noncomme cial ope a o s ha we e al eady managing he basic unc ions o
he ne wo k, o example, wi hin ICANN. On he o he hand, issues ela ed o he in e play o
digi al ne wo ks and echnologies wi h socie y we e ecognized as public policy conce ns, in
which na ional go e nmen s could legi ima ely ha e a ole (WSIS, 2005, a . 35). Al hough i
was subs an ially in a o o he sel ‐ egula ion discou se coali ion and he s a us quo ha i
de ended, he ecogni ion o a public policy space in in e ne go e nance made he mul i-
s akeholde comp omise accep able o he in e na ionalis discou se coali ion, which saw
his space as a iable field o u u e poli ical s uggles.
Wi hin he 3‐yea imespan o WSIS, (2003–2005), he mul is akeholde discou se no
only ook oo in he o ficial—and nea ‐infini ely quo ed—defini ion o wha is mean by
in e ne go e nance
1
bu also became hegemonic beyond he WSIS pa icipan s. I suc-
cess ully cons uc ed a common belie abou he uniqueness o he in e ne and i s global
and insepa able na u e. The uncon es ed idea o a uni e sal in e ne was indeed a s a i-
fica ion o all he p e ious dominan na a i es: he cybe ‐excep ionalism o he libe a ian
discou se, he globalism o he neolibe al discou se, and he mul ila e alism o he in e na-
ionalis discou se. The mul is akeholde discou se also s a ed o s uc u e he field h ough
new na a i es o mul is akeholde ism as a acili a o o policy dialogues based on p inciples
o open and egali a ian pa icipa ion, di e si y, and bo om‐up s akeholde engagemen
(Ho mann, 2016, p. 30). In addi ion, i was ins i u ionalized in a mul ile el polycen ic web o
o ums and o ganiza ions, mos p ominen ly he IGF, c ea ed in 2005 o con inue WSIS
deba es on a yea ly basis. None o hese bodies, acco ding o he p inciple o sepa a ion,
was in ended o eplace ICANN in con olling he DNS, no o p oduce binding decisions.
Ye , mul is akeholde ism u ned in o such a “ eleological goal o In e ne go e nance”
(DeNa dis & Raymond, 2013, p. 2) ha e en many exis ing in e ne ‐ ela ed o ganiza ions,
including ICANN, s a ed o define hemsel es as mul is akeholde ins i u ions (Chenou &
Radu, 2014). As a esul , o e he yea s, he concep s o in e ne go e nance and mul i-
s akeholde go e nance became almos synonymous (Ca , 2015, p. 641). I we can
assume ha , wi hin a gi en policy domain, he highes o de ing capaci y o a discou se
occu s when i is able o define he en i e domain and i s social ac o s, hen a he end o
he 2010s, he mul is akeholde discou se was wi hou any doub he dominan o de ing
de ice o in e ne go e nance. As such, i se ed as a legi imizing discou se able o
gene a e ule compliance wi hou s a e coe cion (Palladino & San aniello, 2021).
Howe e , despi e being able o uni e se e al discou se coali ions and being ins i u ion-
alized so success ully in he field, he discu si e o de o mul is akeholde ism emained
con o e sial. In o he wo ds, i did no ex inguish con o e sies, bu a he channeled hem
in o an ins i u ional amewo k defined by discu si e ules and ou ine p ac ices. A majo
sou ce o conflic emained he ac ha he mul is akeholde discou se con inued o un-
de mine es ablished ins i u ions, eplacing go e nmen ‐domina ed in e na ional bodies wi h
he p inciple o ansna ionalism. In he logic o he new discu si e o de , coo dina ion by
in e go e nmen al o ganiza ions would be an obs acle o he global na u e and de elopmen
678
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
o he in e ne due o di e ging na ional objec i es and he sho ‐sigh ed, selfish in e es s o
some s a es. Con e sely, ep esen a i es o some s a es con inued o insis on hei
demands ha in e ne go e nance p ocesses and he au ho i y o make binding decisions
be pu in he hands o mul ila e al ins i u ions and hence be mo e hea ily subjec ed o s a e
con ol (Ebe & Mau e , 2013, p. 1063; Musiani & Pohle, 2014).
In sum, we define he mul is akeholde discu si e o de as a policy discou se, which
eme ged in he field o in e ne go e nance in he ea ly 2000s, became hegemonic and ully
ins i u ionalized h oughou he fi s decade o he cen u y, and shaped he global poli ics o
in e ne go e nance a leas un il he end o he 2010s. F om his pe spec i e, mul i-
s akeholde ism has no simply become “a p oxy o b oade poli ical s uggles”(DeNa dis &
Raymond, 2013, p. 2); i has also p o ided a discu si e space whe e di e en discou se
coali ions ha e been in mu ual compe i ion, wi h na a i e esou ces being u ilized in he
s uggle o e he con ol o defini ions and meanings (San aniello & Palladino, 2022). The
c i ical posi ions ha e la gely ocused on he ac ual implemen a ions and ou comes o
mul is akeholde ism, bu — o many yea s—did no ques ion he bounda ies no he basic
ules o he game wi hin his space o con en ion. As a ma e o ac , e en ually mul i-
s akeholde ism was e en emb aced by he main al e na i e ins i u ion o ICANN, ha is, he
ITU. Na ional go e nmen s and in e go e nmen al o ganiza ions ha e also become key
ac o s o mul is akeholde ins i u ions, egula ly pa icipa ing in he IGF wi h hei e-
p esen a i es. The capaci y o he mul is akeholde discu si e o de o assimila e and
accommoda e di e en discou se coali ions u ned i in o a space in which di e en
na a i es— ha ha e become dominan a di e en imes—became laye ed in o a complex
sedimen o defini ions and meanings (Figu e 1).
DIGITAL SOVEREIGNTY: THE EXPANSION OF A POLICY
DISCOURSE AND ITS REASONS
S a es ha e always sough , and o en succeeded in, bo h e i o ializing he digi al space
and shaping digi al ne wo ks and digi al se ices, be i h ough legal o p ac ical measu es o
by p o iding he egula o y amewo k o guide he beha io and g ow h o o he s ake-
holde s (Mazzuca o, 2013). Fo many yea s now, bo h au ho i a ian and democ a ic s a es
ha e moni o ed, con olled, and censo ed he exchange o communica ion and da a ia he
in e ne wi hin a pa icula coun y o egion, o example o supp ess de ama o y s a emen s
and dissiden opinions, o p o ec in ellec ual p ope y igh s, o o coun e disin o ma ion
and illegal ac i i ies. In addi ion, by egula ing he condi ions unde which digi al se ice
p o ide s can ope a e ac oss bo de s, s a es ha e also ound ways o exe cise hei powe
wi hou subjec ing he digi al sphe e o e i o ial so e eign y (Bu i, 2017; Celes e, 2021,
p. 5). Thus, he cybe ‐libe a ian belie ha s a es would ha e li le o no au ho i y o e he
in e ne and i s use s—a na a i e ha , as we ha e a gued, s ongly influenced sel ‐
egula o y and, subsequen ly, mul is akeholde discou ses—seems o ha e ou li ed i s
alidi y. F om oday's pe spec i e, digi al ne wo ks a e pe cei ed as a challenge, no a
ba ie o he exe cising o s a e powe .
The idea o digi al so e eign y—which has gained so much a en ion la ely—needs o be
seen in he con ex o asse ing s a e au ho i y o e he in e ne . Howe e , in i s mani old
a ia ions, he digi al so e eign y discou se goes a beyond confi ming and en o cing
in e en ions by na ion s a es in he digi al space. The fi s and mos p ominen ac o o call
o mo e na ional so e eign y in digi al ma e s was he Chinese go e nmen , which had
been p omo ing bo h he p ese a ion o e i o ial bo de s and he ecogni ion o na ional
go e nmen s as he dominan egula o y bodies since he ea ly days o he global in e ne . In
a 2010 whi e pape , i s uc u ed hese a ious claims in he o m o a s a egy ha seeks o
POLICY & INTERNET
|
679
The hi d se o condi ions e e s o ongoing poli ical dynamics wi hin he in e ne go e nance
field i sel : O e he las decade o so, mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance has been expe i-
encing g owing in e nal conflic s caused by inc easingly ob ious p oblems o coo dina ion and he
mul iplica ion o policy enues. Since WSIS, nume ous p ocesses and ini ia i es ha e eme ged
ha claim o ad ance mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance, anging om a ious UN‐manda ed
wo kingg oups ohigh‐le el e en s ini ia ed by membe s o he in e ne go e nance communi y,
such as he Global Mul is akeholde Mee ing on he Fu u e o In e ne Go e nance (NETmundial).
The esul ing di e si y and simul anei y o p ocesses, which o en o e lap in e ms o he issues
co e ed and pe sons in ol ed, cause us a ion among pa icipan s and obse e s. While his has
he e ec o educing bo h he sha ed belie s and he commi men ha cha ac e ized he ea ly
communi y o in e ne go e nance ac o s, i also makes space o hose who c i icize mul i-
s akeholde p ocesses o lacking anspa ency, ep esen a i eness, and en o ceable ou comes
(San aniello, 2021). A he same ime, he e is a g owing impo ance o nego ia ion p ocesses
ha ake place in policy enues ou side o he IGF and o he adi ional mul is akeholde ins i u-
ions. Some examples o his enue‐shi ing a e newly‐c ea ed o ums ha claim o use a mul i-
s akeholde o ma , such as he Wo ld In e ne Con e ence (WIC), o ganized since 2014 by he
Chinese go e nmen as an annual con e ence aiming a c ea ing a new policy deba e on in e ne
go e nance e ol ing a ound he concep o cybe so e eign y. Meanwhile, es ablished in e -
go e nmen al o ganiza ions such as he UN, he ITU and UNESCO egula ly hos con e ences
and conduc consul a ion p ocesses unde he o ficial label o mul is akeholde ism, wi h he
p epa a ion o he “Global Digi al Compac ,”which is o be ag eed upon du ing he UN Summi o
he Fu u e in Sep embe 2024, bea ing wi ness o his end. These kinds o p ocesses, ha
in ol e inpu by nons a e ac o s wi hou employing o he p inciples such as bo om‐up consensus‐
building and anspa en decision‐making, con ibu e o he mul is akeholde p inciple being ex-
panded o p ocesses in which i is only go e nmen s who decide upon he final ou comes. Bu
hey also add o he accep ance o in e go e nmen al o ganiza ions as o ficial enues o global
digi al policy‐making. Thus, hey also gi e g ound o ini ia i es such as he Chinese p oposal o a
new In e ne P o ocol, which has wo ied many—no only because o i s planned echnical ea-
u es, bu because i was ini ially p oposed a he ITU in 2018 and no in he con ex o he In e ne
Enginee ing Task Fo ce (IETF), whe e new s anda ds and p o ocols ha e been discussed and
app o ed since he ea ly days o he in e ne (Taylo e al., 2023). While he high a en ion paid o
hese new enues u he challenges he mul is akeholde discu si e o de , hei ocus on s a e
au ho i y also leads o esis ance and enuncia ion by hose ac o s who a e o n be ween hei
ambi ions o digi al so e eign y and hei longs anding suppo o mul is akeholde ism.
The ou h se o condi ions is ela ed o he changing bo de s o he policy field, and
pa icula ly o he ise o he concep o “digi al go e nance”as some hing dis inc om
“in e ne go e nance.”Today, digi al so e eign y discou ses no longe ocus p ima ily on he
in e ne as he dominan digi al ne wo king echnology. Ins ead, hey ha e a much b oade
scope, eaching in o policy fields ha ha e always been mo e na ional han ansna ional.
Measu es designed o enhance he digi al so e eign y o s a es and na ional economies
may be pa o economic, indus ial, and secu i y s a egies ha go a beyond he in e ne ,
a ge ing he digi al ans o ma ion o en i e sec o s o he economy and socie y a la ge. Fo
ins ance, digi al so e eign y policies e y o en seek o enhance inno a ion and compe i ion
ega ding key echnologies o he u u e, such as a ificial in elligence. Mo eo e , in dem-
oc a ic coun ies, digi al so e eign y e o s also co e he p omo ion o digi al compe ences
and decision‐making capaci ies o indi iduals in hei oles as employees, consume s, and
use s o digi al echnologies and se ices (Pohle & Thiel, 2020). Thus, he discou se on
so e eign y—like he en i e deba e on (na ional) digi al policy—is inc easingly mo ing away
om he he o ic o ne wo ks wi h i s ocus on decen aliza ion and ansna ional coo di-
na ion, hus e en u he endange ing he consis ency o he mul is akeholde discu si e
o de . A possible consequence o his shi is ha ac o s who adi ionally suppo
686
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance, o example, he EU and B azil, may s ay loyal o he
mul is akeholde o de as a as he managemen o he DNS is conce ned, bu may, a he
same ime, con ibu e o he ins i u ionaliza ion o he digi al so e eign y discou se else-
whe e. This ou come would educe he scope o mul is akeholde ism o echnical coo di-
na ion only, while mos public policy issues would be e amed wi hin a so e eign is
pe spec i e— he eby e e ing he hema ic expansion o he in e ne go e nance field ha
occu ed du ing WSIS. Mo eo e , conside ing ha he mul is akeholde discou se, com-
pa ed wi h he digi al so e eign y discou se, is mo e ocused on decision‐making p oce-
du es a he han he p oduc ion o subs an ial esul s, he e is he heo e ical possibili y o a
new o de eme ging om he con e gence be ween he wo discou ses. Especially in
democ a ic egimes, like he EU, such a con e gence could lead o a si ua ion in which
delibe a ion ollows he p inciples o mul is akeholde ism (open consul a ions, ep esen a-
ion o in e es s, e c.), while esul s a e codified in o so e eign ac s like public policies,
egula ions, and laws, all decided upon by go e nmen s. Finally, i seems ha he su i al o
he mul is akeholde discu si e o de is mo e and mo e dependen on he capaci y o he
cu en mechanisms o echnical coo dina ion o wo k p ope ly in ensu ing he uniqueness
and unc ioning o he in e ne . Indeed, al hough he e is cu en ly egula o y and economic
agmen a ion in digi al global go e nance, no agmen a ion on he echnical le el has
occu ed, and he e is li le indica ion ha coun ies will y o b eak he in e ope abili y o he
a ious ne wo ks ha make up he in e ne (Muelle , 2017; Pohle & Voelsen, 2022).
In conclusion, he possibili y ha he digi al so e eign y discou se coali ion can challenge and
eplace he mul is akeholde discu si e o de is s ill o be es ed in p ac ice. Se e al in e ela ed
ac o s will de e mine he ou come o his p ocess. A he momen , he only ce ain hing is ha he
u u e o he in e ne , as well as i s in e play wi h poli ical egimes wo ldwide, is dependen on a
mul i ace ed poli ical s uggle mainly conduc ed h ough he means o discu si e and epis emic
esou ces, such as na a i es, defini ions, and knowledge p oduc ion.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Mau o San aniello's wo k on his esea ch was suppo ed by he I alian Minis y o Uni e si y
and Resea ch (MUR) [G an PRIN 2022KTTSBC—Digi al So e eign y in Compa a i e
Pe spec i e: S a e Au ho i y, Co po a e Powe and Fundamen al Righ s in Cybe space], and
by he Uni ed Na ions Uni e si y Ins i u e on Compa a i e Regional In eg a ion S udies
(UNU‐CRIS). Open access publishing acili a ed by Uni e si a degli S udi di Sale no, as pa
o he Wiley ‐CRUI‐CARE ag eemen .
ORCID
Julia Pohle h p://o cid.o g/0000-0002-9442-4626
Mau o San aniello h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-5582-622X
ENDNOTE
1
The Wo king G oup on In e ne Go e nance (WGIG), es ablished by he UN a e he 2003 WSIS e en , coined
he o ficial UN defini ion o in e ne go e nance, which was also included in he WSIS ou come documen s: “ he
de elopmen and applica ion by Go e nmen s, he p i a e sec o and ci il socie y, in hei espec i e oles, o
sha ed p inciples, no ms, ules, decision‐making p ocedu es, and p og ammes ha shape he e olu ion and use
o he In e ne ”(WSIS, 2005, a . 34).
REFERENCES
ALAI, APC, ALER, CPSR, CONGO, CREIS, DigIT A ica/ITVision, FAWCO, GLOCOM, G eenNe . (2002). Pu ing
people fi s in he in o ma ion socie y. A s a emen on WSIS con en and hemes, endo sed by 22 Ngos and
ci il socie y en i ies. s a emen a he WSIS Gene a phase p ecom—1.h ps://www.i u.in /ne /wsis/docs/pc1/
s a emen s_con en /cs_g oup.doc
POLICY & INTERNET
|
687
Aljunied, A., & Syed, M. (2020). The secu i iza ion o cybe space go e nance in Singapo e. Asian Secu i y,16(3),
343–362. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14799855.2019.1687444
Baldoni, R. (2024). Cha ing digi al so e eign y: A su i al playbook: How o assess and o imp o e he le el o
digi al so e eign y o a coun y. Independen ly published.
Bangladesh. (2003). In e sessional inpu s and con ibu ion, documen WSIS/PC‐3/CONTR/70‐E[ ex ]. Wo ld
Summi o he In o ma ion Socie y. h ps://www.i u.in /dms_pub/i u-s/md/03/wsispc3/c/S03-WSISPC3-C-
0070!!PDF-E.pd
Ba low, J. P. (1996). A decla a ion o he independence o cybe space. Elec onic F on ie Founda ion. h ps://
www.e .o g/cybe space-independence
Basu, A. (2023). De ending he ‘S Wo d’: The language o digi al so e eign y can be a ool o empowe men .
In S. Felds ein, New digi al dilemmas: Resis ing au oc a s, na iga ing geopoli ics, con on ing pla o ms
(pp. 19–22). Ca negie Endowmen o In e na ional Peace.
Belli, L. (2021). BRICS coun ies o build digi al so e eign y. In L. Belli, Cybe BRICS: Cybe secu i y egula ions in
he BRICS coun ies (pp. 271–280). Sp inge In e na ional Publishing. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-
3-030-56405-6_7
Bjola, C. (2021). The Eu opean Union's ques o digi al so e eign y and i s implica ions o he ansa lan ic
ela ionship (DigDiploROx wo king pape 5). Uni e si y o Ox o d.
B azil. (2003). B azilian go e nmen con ibu ion, documen WSIS/PC‐3/CONTR/60‐E[ ex ]. Wo ld Summi o he
In o ma ion Socie y. h ps://www.i u.in /dms_pub/i u-s/md/03/wsispc3/c/S03-WSISPC3-C-0060!!MSW-E.doc
B oede s, D., C is iano, F., & Kaminska, M. (2023). In sea ch o digi al so e eign y and s a egic au onomy:
No ma i e powe Eu ope o he es o i s geopoli ical ambi ions. JCMS: Jou nal o Common Ma ke S udies,
61(5), 1261–1280. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/jcms.13462
B onniko a, O., Daucé, F., E moshina, K., Kosso , V., Lo eluck, B., Musiani, F., Os omooukho a, B., Poupin, P.,
& Zay se a, A. ( o hcoming). Ci cum en ing he “so e eignisa ion”o he Russian in e ne : Towa ds an
in as uc u e‐based sociology o digi al so e eign y and i s esis ances in Russia. In M. Jiang, & L. Belli,
Digi al so e eign y in he BRICS coun ies: How he Global Sou h and eme ging powe alliances a e e-
shaping digi al go e nance (pp. 130–147). Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Budni sky, S., & Jia, L. (2018). B anding In e ne so e eign y: Digi al media and he Chinese–Russian cybe al-
liance. Eu opean Jou nal o Cul u al S udies,21(5), 594–613. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1367549417751151
Bu i, M. (2017). The egula ion o da a flows h ough ade ag eemen s. Geo ge own Jou nal o In e na ional Law,
48(407), 43.
Bu well, F., & P opp, K. (2020). The Eu opean Union and he sea ch o digi al so e eign y: Building ‘Fo ess
Eu ope’o p epa ing o a new wo ld? (Fu u e o Eu ope Ini ia i e). A lan ic Council. h ps://www.
a lan iccouncil.o g/in-dep h- esea ch- epo s/issue-b ie / he-eu opean-union-and- he-sea ch- o -digi al-
so e eign y/
Ca pen e , B. E. (1996). A chi ec u al p inciples o he in e ne ( eques o commen s RFC 1958). In e ne En-
ginee ing Task Fo ce. h ps://doi.o g/10.17487/RFC1958
Ca , M. (2015). Powe plays in global in e ne go e nance. Millennium—Jou nal o In e na ional S udies,43,
640–659. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0305829814562655
Ca oll, S. R., He czog, E., Hudson, M., Russell, K., & S all, S. (2021). Ope a ionalizing he CARE and FAIR
p inciples o indigenous da a u u es. Scien ific Da a,8(1), 108. h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41597-021-00892-0
Celes e, E. (2021). Digi al so e eign y in he EU: challenges and u u e pe spec i es. In F. Fabb ini, E. Celes e, &
J. Quinn (Eds.), Da a p o ec ion beyond bo de s. T ansa lan ic pe spec i es on ex a e i o iali y and so -
e eign y (pp. 1–17). Ha Publishing. h ps://www.bloomsbu yp o essional.com/uk/da a-p o ec ion-beyond-
bo de s-9781509940677/
Chenou, J.‐M. (2014). F om cybe ‐libe a ianism o neolibe alism: In e ne excep ionalism, mul i‐s akeholde ism,
and he ins i u ionalisa ion o in e ne go e nance in he 1990s. Globaliza ions,11(2), 205–223. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1080/14747731.2014.887387
Chenou, J.‐M., & Radu, R. (2014). In oduc ion. In R. Radu, J.‐M. Chenou, & R. H. Webe , The e olu ion o global
in e ne go e nance: P inciples and policies in he making (pp. 1–19). Sp inge . h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-
3-642-45299-4_1
Claessen, E. (2020). Reshaping he In e ne —The impac o he secu i isa ion o in e ne in as uc u e on ap-
p oaches o in e ne go e nance: The case o Russia and he EU. Jou nal o Cybe Policy,5(1), 140–157.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/23738871.2020.1728356
Cla k, D. D. (1992). A cloudy c ys al ball: Visions o he u u e, plena y p esen a ion a 24 h mee ing o he In e ne
Enginee ing Task Fo ce, Camb idge, Mass., 13–17 July 1992.h ps://g oups.csail.mi .edu/ana/People/DDC/
u u e_ie _92.pd
Coleman, D. (2018). Digi al colonialism: The 21s cen u y sc amble o A ica h ough he ex ac ion and con ol o
use da a and he limi a ions o da a p o ec ion laws. Michigan Jou nal o Race & Law,24, 417.
688
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
C eeme s, R. (2016). The Chinese cybe ‐so e eign y agenda. In M. Leona d, Connec i i y wa s: Why mig a ion,
finance and ade a e he geo‐economic ba leg ounds o he u u e (pp. 120–125). Eu opean Council on
Fo eign Rela ions.
Cuba. (2003). Commen s and p oposals o he Go e nmen o he Republic o Cuba on he D a Decla a ion o
P inciples, Documen WSIS/PC‐3/CONTR/104‐E. Wo ld Summi o he In o ma ion Socie y. h ps://www.i u.
in /dms_pub/i u-s/md/03/wsispc3/c/S03-WSISPC3-C-0104!!PDF-E.pd
Dane , D., & Des o ges, A. (2020). Sou e aine é numé ique e au onomie s a égique en Eu ope: Du concep aux
éali és géopoli iques (Digi al so e eign y and s a egic au onomy in Eu ope: F om he concep o geopoli ical
eali ies). He odo e,177–178(2), 179–195.
DeNa dis, L., & Raymond, M. (2013). Thinking clea ly abou mul is akeholde in e ne go e nance (SSRN
schola ly pape 2354377).h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.2354377
Depa men o Comme ce (DOC). (1998). Managemen o in e ne names and add esses; s a emen o policy
980212036–8146–02. Fede al Regis e ,63(111), 31741–31751.
Ebe , H., & Mau e , T. (2013). Con es ed cybe space and ising powe s. Thi d Wo ld Qua e ly,34(6), 1054–1074.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01436597.2013.802502
Epi ano a, A. (2020). Deciphe ing Russia's “So e eign In e ne Law”: Tigh ening con ol and accele a ing he
splin e ne . Fo schungsins i u de Deu schen Gesellscha ü Auswä ige Poli ik e.V. h ps://www.ssoa .in o/
ssoa /handle/documen /66221
Eu opean Commission. (2005). Commission ou lines EU nego ia ion p inciples o he Wo ld Summi on he
In o ma ion Socie y in Tunis. IP/05/672 [ ex ]. Eu opean Commission. h ps://ec.eu opa.eu/commission/
p essco ne /de ail/en/IP_05_672
Fische , D. (2022). The digi al so e eign y ick: Why he so e eign y discou se ails o add ess he s uc u al
dependencies o digi al capi alism in he global sou h. Zei sch i Fü Poli ikwissenscha ,32, 383–402. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1007/s41358-022-00316-4
Flonk, D., Jach en uchs, M., & Obendiek, A. S. (2020). Au ho i y conflic s in in e ne go e nance: Libe als s.
so e eign is s? Global Cons i u ionalism,9(2), 364–386. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S2045381720000167
Gaglia done, I. (2023). A pos colonial pe spec i e on digi al so e eign y. In S. Felds ein, New digi al dilemmas:
Resis ing au oc a s, na iga ing geopoli ics, con on ing pla o ms (pp. 23–26). Ca negie Endowmen o
In e na ional Peace.
Gaspe , D., & Ap ho pe, R. (1996). In oduc ion: Discou se analysis and policy discou se. The Eu opean Jou nal o
De elopmen Resea ch,8,1–15. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09578819608426650
Gehl Sampa h, P., & T egenna, F. (Eds.). (2022). Digi al so e eign y: A ican pe spec i es. DSI/NRF Sou h A ican
Resea ch Chai in Indus ial De elopmen . h ps://doi.o g/10.5281/zenodo.5851685
Goldsmi h, J., & Wu, T. (2006). Who con ols he in e ne ?: Illusions o a bo de less wo ld (1s ed.). Ox o d
Uni e si y P ess. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/oso/9780195152661.001.0001
Go , D., & Schünemann, W. J. (2013). C ea ing a secu e cybe space—Secu i iza ion in In e ne go e nance
discou ses and disposi i es in Ge many and Russia. The In e na ional Re iew o In o ma ion E hics,20,
37–51. h ps://doi.o g/10.29173/i ie159
Haje , M. (1993). Discou se coali ions and he ins i u ionaliza ion o p ac ice: The case o acid ain in B i ain. In F.
Fische , & J. Fo es e , The a gumen a i e u n in policy analysis and planning (pp. 43–76). Duke Uni e si y
P ess.
Haje , M. A. (1995). The poli ics o en i onmen al discou se: Ecological mode niza ion and he policy p ocess.
Cla endon P ess.
Heeks, R. (2022). Digi al inequali y beyond he digi al di ide: Concep ualizing ad e se digi al inco po a ion in he
global Sou h. In o ma ion Technology o De elopmen ,28(4), 688–704. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/02681102.
2022.2068492
He mes, S., Clemons, E., Sch eieck, M., P ab, S., Mi e, M., Böhm, M., Wiesche, M., & K cma , H. (2020). B eeding
g ounds o digi al pla o ms: Explo ing he sou ces o Ame ican pla o m domina ion, china's pla o m sel ‐
su ficiency, and Eu ope's Pla o m gap. In P oceedings o he 28 h Eu opean Con e ence on In o ma ion
Sys ems (ECIS), An Online AIS Con e ence, June 15‐17, 2020 (pp. 1–18). h ps://aisel.aisne .o g/ecis2020_
p/132
Hobbs, C. (ed.). (2020). Eu ope's digi al so e eign y: F om ulemake o supe powe in he age o US‐China i al y
(pp. 1–99). Eu opean Council on Fo eign Rela ions.
Ho mann, J. (2016). Mul i‐s akeholde ism in In e ne go e nance: Pu ing a fic ion in o p ac ice. Jou nal o Cybe
Policy,1(1), 29–49. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/23738871.2016.1158303
Howa h, D. R., & To fing, J. (Eds.). (2005). Discou se heo y in Eu opean poli ics: Iden i y, policy, and go e n-
ance. Palg a e Macmillan.
Jiang, M. (2010). Au ho i a ian in o ma ionalism: China's app oach o in e ne so e eign y. SAIS Re iew o
In e na ional A ai s,30(3), 71–89.
POLICY & INTERNET
|
689
Jiang, M., & Belli, L.( o hcoming). Con es ing digi al so e eign y: Un angling a complex and mul i ace ed concep .
In M. Jiang, & L. Belli (Eds.), Digi al so e eign y in he BRICS coun ies: How he Global Sou h and eme ging
powe alliances a e eshaping digi al go e nance (pp. 1–29). Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Jones, H. (2009). Policy‐making as discou se: A e iew o ecen knowledge‐ o‐policy li e a u e. In o ma ion and
Knowledge Managemen (ODI‐IKM) Wo king Pape s (p. 5). O e seas De elopmen Ins i u e. h ps://www.
eme gen wo ks.ne /si es/de aul /files/ikmeme gen _a chi e/090911-ikm-wo king-%20pape -5-policy-making-
as-discou se.pd
Lambach, D., & Oppe mann, K. (2022). Na a i es o digi al so e eign y in Ge man poli ical discou se. Go e nance,
36, 693–709. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/go e.12690
on de Leyen, U. (2020). S a e o he union 2020. Eu opean Commission. h ps://s a e-o - he-union.ec.eu opa.eu/
s a e-union-2020_en
Li inenko, A. (2021). Re‐Defining bo de s online: Russia's s a egic na a i e on In e ne so e eign y. Media and
Communica ion,9(4), 1–12. h ps://doi.o g/10.17645/mac. 9i4.4292
Madiega, T. (2020). Digi al so e eign y o Eu ope (pp. 1–12). Eu opean Pa liamen a y Resea ch Se ice.
Mage , A., & Ka zenbach, C. (2021). Fu u e imagina ies in he making and go e ning o digi al echnology: Mul iple,
con es ed, commodified. New Media & Socie y,23(2), 223–236. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1461444820929321
Mazzuca o, M. (2013). The en ep eneu ial s a e. An hem P ess. h ps://demos.co.uk/p ojec / he-en ep eneu ial-
s a e/
Me kel, A. (2019). Ge man Chancello 's ema ks o he IGF 2019. In e ne Go e nance Fo um. h ps://in go o um.
o g/en/con en /ge man-chancello s- ema ks- o- he-ig -2019
Mölle s, N. (2021). Making digi al e i o y: Cybe secu i y, echno‐na ionalism, and he mo al bounda ies o he
s a e. Science, Technology, & Human Values,46(1), 112–138. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0162243920904436
Monsees, L., & Lambach, D. (2022). Digi al so e eign y, geopoli ical imagina ies, and he ep oduc ion o Eu opean
iden i y. Eu opean Secu i y,31(3), 377–394. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09662839.2022.2101883
MTST. (2023). Homeless wo ke mo emen in B azil and he s uggle o digi al so e eig ny. Nucleo de Tecnologia
Do MTST. h ps://nucleode ecnologia.com.b /docs/Ca ilha-MTSTec-ENG.pd
Muelle , M. (2010). Ne wo ks and s a es: The global poli ics o In e ne go e nance. MIT P ess.
Muelle , M. (2017). Will he in e ne agmen ?: So e eign y, globaliza ion and cybe space. Poli y P ess.
Musiani, F., & Pohle, J. (2014). NETmundial: Only a landma k e en i “Digi al Cold Wa ” he o ic abandoned.
In e ne Policy Re iew,3(1), 1–9.
Noce i, J. (2015). Con es and conques : Russia and global in e ne go e nance. In e na ional A ai s,91(1),
111–130. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1468-2346.12189
Noone, G. (2022). How New Zealand's Māo i people a e figh ing o hei da a so e eign y.h ps:// echmoni o .ai/
policy/p i acy-and-da a-p o ec ion/mao i-da a-so e eign y-new-zealand-indigenous
O iz F eule , J. (2023). The weaponiza ion o p i a e co po a e in as uc u e: In e ne agmen a ion and coe ci e
diplomacy in he 21s cen u y. Global Media and China,8(1), 6–23. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
20594364221139729
Palladino, N., & San aniello, M. (2021). Legi imacy, powe , and inequali ies in he mul is akeholde in e ne go -
e nance: Analyzing IANA ansi ion. Sp inge In e na ional Publishing. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-
3-030-56131-4
Pin o, R. Á. (2018). Digi al so e eign y o digi al colonialism? New ensions o p i acy, secu i y and na ional
policies. Su : Re is a In e nacional de Di ei os Humanos,15(27), 15–27.
Pohle, J. (2020). Digi ale Sou e äni ä (Digi al so e eign y). In T. Klenk, F. Nullmeie , & G. Wewe (Eds.), Hand-
buch Digi alisie ung in S aa und Ve wal ung (Handbook o digi alisa ion in s a e and adminis a ion)
(pp. 241–253). Sp inge VS.
Pohle, J., & Thiel, T. (2020). Digi al so e eign y. In e ne Policy Re iew,9(4), 1–19. h ps://doi.o g/10.14763/2020.
4.1532
Pohle, J., & Voelsen, D. (2022). Cen ali y and powe . The s uggle o e he echno‐poli ical configu a ion o he
In e ne and he global digi al o de . Policy & In e ne ,14(1), 13–27. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/poi3.296
Polyako a, A., & Mese ole, C. (2019). Expo ing digi al au ho i a ianism, he Russian and Chinese models.
Democ acy & Diso de Policy B ie . h ps://www.b ookings.edu/wp-con en /uploads/2019/08/FP_20190827_
digi al_au ho i a ianism_polyako a_mese ole.pd
San aniello, M. (2021). F om go e nance denial o s a e egula ion. A con o e sy‐based ypology o in e ne
go e nance models. In B. Hagga , N. Tusiko , & J. A. Schol e, Powe and au ho i y in in e ne go e nance:
Re u n o he s a e? (pp. 15–37). Rou ledge. h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9781003008309
San aniello, M. ( o hcoming). Digi al so e eign y in he Eu o‐Medi e anean Region. In E. Celes e, T. A. Robles, G.
Depoo e , & T. Fa a o (Eds.), Digi al so e eign y and g een ansi ion. Ha Publishing.
San aniello, M., & Palladino, N. (2022). Discou se coali ion in in e ne go e nance. Shaping global policy by
na a i es and defini ions. In A. Calde a o, & M. Ma zouki (Eds.), In e ne diplomacy: Shaping he global
poli ics o cybe space (pp. 61–86). Rowman & Li lefield. h ps://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/74623
690
|
POHLE and SANTANIELLO
Saudi A abia. (2003). Commen s o he kingdom o Saudi A abia on d a decla a ion o p inciples. documen WSIS/
PC‐3/Con /155‐E[ ex ]. Wo ld Summi o he In o ma ion Socie y. h ps://www.i u.in /dms_pub/i u-s/md/03/
wsispc3/c/S03-WSISPC3-C-0155!!PDF-E.pd
Schmid , V. (2012). Discu si e ins i u ionalism: Scope, dynamics, and philosophical unde pinnings. In F. Fische , &
H. Go weis, The a gumen a i e u n e isi ed: Public policy as communica i e p ac ice (pp. 83–113). Duke
Uni e si y P ess.
S nicek, N. (2017). Pla o m capi alism. Poli y P ess.
S adnik, I. (2019). In e ne go e nance in Russia–So e eign basics o independen une . TPRC47. The 47 h
Resea ch Con e ence on Communica ion, In o ma ion and In e ne Policy 2019, Ame ican Uni e si y
Washing on, College o Law. h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.3421984
Taylo , E., Jones, K., & Caei o, C. (2023). Technical s anda ds and human igh s. The case o new IP. In C.
Saba ini, Reclaiming human igh s in a changing wo ld o de , B ooking Ins i u ion P ess (pp. 185–215).
Cha am House and B ookings Ins i u ion P ess. h ps://ss n.com/abs ac =3907165
Thum a , J. (2022). The no m de elopmen o digi al so e eign y be ween China, Russia, he EU and he US: F om
he la e 1990s o he Co id‐c isis 2020/21 as ca aly ic e en . In D. Hallinan, R. Leenes, & P. de He , En o cing
igh s in a changing wo ld (pp. 1–44). Ha Publishing.
Tosza, S. (2021). In e ne se ice p o ide s as law en o ce s and adjudica o s. A public ole o p i a e ac o s.
Compu e Law & Secu i y Re iew,43, 105614. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.cls .2021.105614
Wal e , M., Kuku ai, T., Russo Ca oll, S., & Rod iguez‐Lonebea , D. (Eds). (2021). Indigenous da a so e eign y
and policy. Rou ledge.
WSIS. (2005). Tunis agenda o he in o ma ion socie y. WSIS‐05/TUNIS/DOC/6(Re . 1)‐E. Wo ld Summi o he
In o ma ion Socie y 2003‐Tunis 2005. h ps://www.i u.in /ne /wsis/docs2/ unis/o /6 e 1.h ml
Wu, T. (2010). Is in e ne excep ionalism dead? In B. Szoka, & A. Ma cus. In The nex digi al decade: Essays on
he u u e o he in e ne (pp. 179–188). TechF eedom.
Zi ain, J. (2017). “Ne wa ”: The unwelcome mili a iza ion o he In e ne has a i ed. Bulle in o he A omic
Scien is s,73(5), 300–304.
Zubo , S. (2019). Su eillance capi alism and he challenge o collec i e ac ion. New Labo Fo um,28(1), 10–29.
How o ci e his a icle: Pohle, J., San aniello, M. (2024). F om mul is akeholde ism
o digi al so e eign y: Towa d a new discu si e o de in in e ne go e nance? Policy &
In e ne ,16, 672–691. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/poi3.426
POLICY & INTERNET
|
691
