and adapt to the commission of technology-facilitated crime, policymakers and investigators must undergo the process of researching the issues, forging consensus and developing legal and investigative responses in order to address newly emerging forms of ICT-facilitated crime. In the international context, cultural variations and differences in legal systems and traditions can further complicate the work of and cooperation between law- and policymakers as well as law enforcement agencies. In addition, the fact that a significant proportion of Internet infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, requires the close engagement of private sector service providers. Efforts to effectively and comprehensively combat ICT-facilitated child abuse and exploitation thus necessitate a multistakeholder approach, including and actively involving children, families, communities, governments, members of civil society and the private sector.22 It is important to note that not all forms of ICT-facilitated child abuse and exploitation fundamentally diverge from those that are not facilitated by ICTs. In fact, many forms of ICT-facilitated child abuse and exploitation involve the same dynamics, patterns and structures as non-digital ones23 and in many cases, ICTs only serve to facilitate the commission of already-known types of crimes and forms of criminality. On the other hand, new information technologies have also given rise to some new forms of child abuse and exploitation that are enabled exclusively through the use of ICTs. This study seeks to identify and describe some of the more common forms of ICT-facilitated child abuse and exploitation, with a view to a complete picture of the problem and the formulation of a comprehensive approach to prevent and combat such crimes. Scope and structure of the study The preparation of the study was facilitated by an informal expert group meeting on ICT-facilitated abuse and exploitation of children, held in Vienna from 23 to 25 September 2013. The meeting brought together international experts from law enforcement, research, industry and civil society. This study is based primarily on open source research and the outcomes of the informal expert group meeting. In accordance with the mandate of ECOSOC resolution 2011/33, it also takes into account documents and materials from other 22 23 UNICEF, 2011. P. vi. UNICEF, 2011. P. vi. entities of the United Nations system. Where relevant, it makes reference to information from the 2013 Comprehensive Study on Cybercrime prepared by UNODC for the consideration of the open-ended intergovernmental expert group on cybercrime (hereinafter, “Cybercrime Study”).24 The Cybercrime Study was based on information received by UNODC from 69 Member States, 40 private sector organizations, 16 academic organizations and 11 intergovernmental organizations, and included a review of more than 500 open source documents obtained through systematic academic and enterprise literature searches. Of particularly relevance to the present study is the description contained in the Cybercrime Study of the various acts and courses of conduct constituting cybercrime in general. This is reproduced in figure I below. The list includes 14 distinct types of acts falling into three broader categories of cybercrime, as indicated in the table below.25As noted in the Cybercrime Study, the list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to represent “act descriptions” that can be used as a starting point for analysis and discussion. In its resolution 65/230, the General Assembly requested the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) to establish, in line with paragraph 42 of the Salvador Declaration on Comprehensive Strategies for Global Challenges: Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Systems and Their Development in a Changing World, an open-ended intergovernmental expert group, to conduct a comprehensive study of the problem of cybercrime and responses to it by Member States, the international community and the private sector, including the exchange of information on national legislation, best practices, technical assistance and international cooperation, with a view to examining options to strengthen existing and to propose new national and international legal or other responses to cybercrime. In its resolution 67/189, the General Assembly noted with appreciation the work of the open-ended intergovernmental expert group to conduct a comprehensive study of the problem of cybercrime and encouraged it to enhance its efforts to complete its work and to present the outcome of the study to the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice in due course. The first session of the expert group was held in Vienna from 17 to 21 January 2011. At that meeting, the expert group reviewed and adopted a collection of topics and a methodology for the study. At its second meeting, held from 25 to 28 February 2013, the expert group considered the draft comprehensive study prepared by the Secretariat on behalf of the group, as tasked by the methodology agreed by the expert group at its first session in 2011, on the basis of information received from Member States, intergovernmental organizations, enterprises, and academia. During its 22nd session, the CCPCJ expressed its appreciation for the work done thus far by the expert group and in Resolution 22/7 requested the group to continue its work towards fulfilling its mandate. 25 UNODC, 2013. Cybercrime Study. P. 16. 24 Introduction 3