51. Many challenges were identified that hinder or reduce the effectiveness of capacity-building. The lack of coordination at the international level was highlighted as a significant concern. Practical challenges in the design, delivery, sustainability and accessibility of capacity-building activities, and the lack of specific metrics to measure their impact, were also raised. Once capacity has been built, some countries face the challenge of talent retention in a competitive market for ICT professionals. States highlighted that lack of access to ICT security-related technologies was also an issue. 52. States underscored that ICT-related capacity-building efforts would be more effective if they were guided by widely accepted principles. 7 To this end, States stressed the importance of national ownership in the identification of capacity-building and technical assistance needs and priorities. They also noted that capacity-building should be demand-driven, tailored to specific needs and contexts, evidence-based, results-oriented, and have sustainable impacts. Capacity-building initiatives should be transparent and accountable. Additionally, it was emphasized that capacity-building should be non-discriminatory, politically neutral, gender sensitive, and focus on peaceful outcomes. In this regard, States underscored that technical capacity-building and capacity-building on the normative framework should go hand-in-hand. 53. States stressed that capacity-building is a shared responsibility as well as a reciprocal endeavour, a socalled “two-way street”, in which participants learn from each other and where all sides benefit from the general improvement to global ICT security. The value of South–South and triangular cooperation was also recalled. 54. The importance of a multi-stakeholder approach in capacity-building was highlighted. States noted in particular that sustainability in capacity-building can be enhanced by an approach that entails engagement and partnership with local civil society, academic institutions and private sector actors. 55. States stressed that there was a need for greater coordination in capacity-building efforts. In this regard, States suggested that existing platforms within the United Nations and in the wider global community could be used to strengthen coordination. These platforms could be used to share national views on capacity-building requirements, encourage the sharing of lessons and experiences from both recipients and providers of support, and facilitate access to information on capacitybuilding and technical assistance programmes. These platforms could also support the mobilization of resources or assist with pairing available resources with requests for capacity-building support and technical assistance. It was suggested that the development of a global capacity-building agenda would help to ensure greater coherence in capacity-building efforts. 56. States called attention to the “gender digital divide” and urged that specific measures be taken at the national and international levels to address gender equality and the meaningful participation of women in international discussions and capacity-building programmes on ICTs and international security. States expressed appreciation for programmes that have facilitated the participation of women in multilateral ICT-security discussions. The need to strengthen linkages between this topic and the United Nations Women, Peace and Security agenda was also emphasized. 7 These include general principles, such as the 2011 Busan Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (”Busan Principles”), as well as those developed specifically for capacity-building in ICT-related fields. 10