Clarity on what is known vs. what is emerging

• The group agreed to organise DIMPACT’s policy‑related work around a clear distinction between established evidence and genuine areas of uncertainty - reinforcing well‑supported positions while openly framing open research questions on emerging topics such as AI.

Avoiding headline‑driven responses

• Participants highlighted the risk of reactive policymaking driven by incomplete technical understanding, reinforcing the importance of proactive knowledge‑building rather than responding to the topic of the week.

Accessible communication for decision‑makers

• Strong consensus emerged around developing FAQ‑style resources aimed at non‑technical decision‑makers, including policymakers, sustainability teams and senior leaders, to provide context, nuance and links to credible research.

Prioritising knowledge over lobbying

• The group agreed DIMPACT should focus first on consolidating and structuring its knowledge base, enabling more consistent, fact‑based engagement when policy discussions arise.

Recognising regional policy differences

• Europe and parts of APAC were identified as more active in digital sustainability regulation than the US, with a growing mix of EU‑level and national initiatives shaping expectations for digital services.

DIMPACT as a neutral convenor

• The discussion reinforced DIMPACT’s unique value as a non‑polarised, technically grounded forum capable of cutting through noise and debunking common misconceptions.

Stronger structure and cadence affirmed

• The group confirmed monthly Strategy Working Group meetings and agreed next steps to formalise terms of reference and align content planning across all working groups.

The session strengthened alignment on how DIMPACT can most effectively influence the debate - by grounding discussions in evidence, clearly communicating uncertainty, and supporting better‑informed decisions across industry and policy.