Page 54 - Building digital public infrastructure for cities and communities

bias, issues of interpretability and unequal access. To address these concerns, international
frameworks such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)’s
Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (UNESCO, 2024) and the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)’s P7000 series provide structured methodologies for
risk assessment and ethical governance (IEEE, 2021). Complementary initiatives like the IEEE’s
Ethically Aligned Design and OECD’s AI Principles further outline requirements for transparency,
accountability and human oversight. Despite this progress, approximately 85 per cent of ITU
member states currently lack dedicated AI governance policies, underscoring the urgency of
institutional capacity-building in this domain (ITU, 2024; Chakraborty, 2024; Hamin & Hanson,
2024).

Cities should mandate ethics impact assessments for all algorithmic systems, particularly those
deployed in high-stakes areas such as predictive policing or social welfare eligibility. These
assessments should be accompanied by legally codified requirements for transparency such as
public model documentation, audit trails and provisions for human-in-the-loop decision-making.
In the case of blockchain applications used for public registries or financial services, policymakers
must consider not only technical performance but also inclusivity, governance mechanisms and
the socio-economic implications of decentralization, ensuring that no group is inadvertently
marginalized.

Moreover, blockchain-based DPI systems should adhere to internationally recognized standards
(e.g., W3C’s decentralized identifiers, and blockchain requirements and functional architectures in
relevant ITU-T Recommendations on IoT, digital twins and smart sustainable cities and communities)
to support verifiable credentials and self-controlled identity, protecting ownership, control and
usage of their sensitive data online, while avoiding single points of failure. To ensure global
alignment and context-sensitive governance, policymakers must advance multilateral cooperation
and embed ethical principles within culturally responsive frameworks, an approach increasingly
emphasized in multilateral forums such as the G20’s Digital Public Infrastructure agenda.

7.4 Accessibility and inclusion standards

The digital divide is characterized by unequal access and fragmented solutions. DPI offers
accessible learning opportunities for all and the digital transformation of the education space by
providing a strong yet flexible foundation, an infrastructure that enables a plug-and-play approach
for educational applications, fostering innovation and driving real impact (UNDP, n.d. b).

Inclusive DPI requires strict adherence to accessibility standards that address the needs of
marginalized populations, particularly persons with disabilities. Standards like ITU-T Y.4204,
ITU-T Y.4211 and ITU-T Y.4219 are increasingly recognized as best practices in different smart
cities and communities use cases for accessibility and inclusion. Frameworks such as the WCAG
and ISO 30071-1 provide comprehensive technical and organizational guidance for designing
barrier-free digital interfaces. These include specifications for screen reader compatibility, logically

41