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 cyber capacitybuilding agenda under the auspices of the United Nations could help to ensure greater coherence in capacity-building efforts and that voluntary self-assessment surveys may help States to identify and prioritize their capacity-building needs or ability to provide support. 83. While recalling the primary responsibility of States for maintaining a secure, safe and trusted ICT environment, the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach to capacity-building that addresses technical and policy gaps in all relevant sectors of society was also emphasized. States noted in particular that sustainability in capacity-building can be enhanced by an approach that entails engagement and partnership with local civil society, the technical community, academic institutions and private sector actors and through the creation of expert rosters and hubs. In this regard, it was also emphasized that national approaches to ICT security could benefit from adopting a cross-sectoral, holistic and multi-disciplinary approach to capacity-building, including by enhancing national coordination bodies with the participation of relevant stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of programmes. Such an approach may also help address challenges posed by newly emerging technologies. Commented [A28]: Transfer para 83 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted 84. 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, including through the collection of gender-disaggregated data. 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. Commented [A29]: Transfer para 84 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted 85. States noted that many obstacles hinder or reduce the effectiveness of capacity-building. Insufficient coordination and complementarity in the identification and delivery of capacitybuilding efforts were highlighted as significant concerns. States also raised practical concerns related to the identification of capacity-building needs, timeliness of response to requests for capacity-building assistance, as well as in the design, delivery, sustainability and accessibility of capacity-building activities, and the lack of specific metrics to measure their impact. In many contexts, insufficient human, financial and technical resources impedes capacity-building efforts and progress to narrow the digital divide. Once capacity has been built, some countries face the challenge of talent retention in a competitive market for ICT professionals. States mentioned that lack of access to ICT security-related technologies was also an issue. Commented [A30]: Transfer para 85 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted Conclusions and Recommendations 86. Ensuring an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful ICT environment is a common but differentiated responsibility that requires effective cooperation among States to reduce risks to international peace and security. Capacity-building is a crucial element of such cooperation. Taking into consideration and further elaborating upon widely accepted principles, States agreed that capacity-building in relation to State use of ICTs in the context of international security should be guided by the following principles: Process and Purpose • Capacity building should be a sustainable process, comprising specific activities by and for different actors. 15