On 16 and 17 December 2025 the UN General Assembly held the high-level meeting of the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS+20) in New York, adopting an outcome document at the close.

What the outcome document says

The document reaffirms countries’ commitment to a digital future that is people-centred, grounded in human rights and based on the principles of the UN Charter. It calls for faster action to close digital divides, greater investment in digital infrastructure and skills, and more predictable policy environments to support digital development.

On artificial intelligence, the document highlights the importance of trustworthy governance of data and AI, positioning it as a continuation of commitments already made under the Global Digital Compact.

One background figure is worth noting: while global internet penetration has reached a high level, the digital divide between developing and advanced economies — and between genders — remains significant.

Why the document matters to companies

The UN outcome document creates no direct legal obligation, but it has two practical effects.

First, it is a common vocabulary for national AI legislation and policy. Phrases such as “people-centred”, “trustworthy governance” and “inclusion” will keep appearing in official documents and standards bodies’ texts. In multi-jurisdiction compliance, identifying these common baselines reduces the cost of re-arguing for each market. See our multi-jurisdiction service.

Second, it signals distributive issues in AI governance. By placing digital divides, capacity building and inclusion at the centre, the document indicates that future international rule discussions will involve the distribution of technical capability and rule-making voice. For companies going global, this bears on the direction of emerging-market rules. See our note on the China–ASEAN AI governance workshop.

Connecting to existing international discussion

The WSIS+20 conclusion is highly consistent with the governance report released at the Wuzhen Summit in November 2025: both acknowledge fragmentation in global AI governance and both advocate advancing coordination through standards, inclusion and trust. See our note on the Wuzhen Summit global AI governance review.

The difference is level: Wuzhen represents multi-stakeholder and industry discussion; WSIS+20 is an intergovernmental conclusion at General Assembly level. The two reinforce each other, showing that “people-centred, trustworthy governance” has moved from proposal to intergovernmental consensus.

How companies can use it

First, treat international consensus as a reference baseline. For a multi-market product, build a baseline from common elements — transparency, explainability, human oversight, non-discrimination — then layer jurisdictional increments. See our multi-jurisdiction service.

Second, watch where standardisation lands. Intergovernmental consensus usually filters down into technical standards, and standards carry certification and assessment. Tracking them is more proactive than waiting for binding legislation.

Third, build inclusion into emerging-market design. For markets with weaker digital infrastructure, language, accessibility and cost design directly affect landing, and shape how local regulators assess the product.

International consensus will not immediately change companies’ obligations, but it sets the direction of national rules over the next few years. Folding it into trend judgment is low-cost and high-return work for going-global planning.

This article is based on the outcome document of the UN General Assembly WSIS+20 high-level meeting and public reporting. It is for general reference only and does not constitute legal advice.