Re: VCs at GS1

Hi Phil,

Great! Glad I could be helpful. Looking forward to further discussions with
you and the community as these efforts and activities evolve.

Best,
Lucy

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:06 PM Phil Archer <phil.archer@gs1.org> wrote:

> Thank you, Lucy, that's super-helpful of you. I appreciate the time you
> took to compile this.
>
> One bit of reassurance - Loh Sin Yong from IMDA is speaking at our Global
> Forum event next week. We have several relevant activities in APAC.
>
> I'll add a link to this thread from the doc - I don't want to lose this
> valuable input.
>
> Phil
>
> On 11 February 2025 16:24, Lucy Yang wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> It is great to see that GS1 invested in developing the tech landscape. And
> thank you for sharing with us the output and the small steps you are about
> to take at GS1. Taking a measured approach is sensible.
>
> I also agree that there is quite some complexity in implementing VCs and
> DIDs for the majority of organizations. It is even hard for those of us
> actively working in the decentralized identity space to keep up-to-date
> with what is going on. This is the downside of decentralization - too much
> stuff going on at the same time and too many non-trivial decisions to make.
> The advantage for long-standing membership-based organizations is that it
> is relatively easier to find a balance point between centralization
> (convenience) and decentralization thanks to the existing trust you have
> with members.
>
> I have a few comments on the tech landscape for your reference:
>
> *       Missing activities outside of Europe and US: Knowing that GS1 has
> a global membership base, I'd like to point out that the technical
> landscape seems to be missing activities outside Europe and US. For
> example, TradeTrust <https://www.tradetrust.io/>  led by the Singapore
> government to facilitate digital trade, and Trustana <
> https://www.trustana.com/> , a venture-backed commerce platform gaining
> traction in the APAC region. Some of the VC and DID influence may not start
> in or reach the supply chain space, but still worth noting. For example,
> with MOSIP implementing VCs for its Inji module <
> https://docs.mosip.io/1.2.0/collab-getting-started-guide/collab-inji-setup-guide>
> , more developing countries will get exposure to these emerging standards.
> I joined a GLEIF vLEI update session at the last IIW and learnt that the
> interest in vLEs in the APAC region is quite strong.
> *       Geographical differences in adopting standards: The reason why it
> is important to look at the global landscape of VC and DID adoption is
> because there are geographic differences in how technology is adopted. Some
> of my personal observations/thoughts:
>
>         *       Europe is leading the way in a legislation/regulation
> first approach, but the effort is huge and complex. Even though the
> timeline is quite aggressive, I am uncertain whether the market and
> majority of players will be ready in time. Since many are still funded by
> government grants with an unproven commercial model, we also don't know
> what will happen when the funds run short/out. I am going to DICE
> Ecosystems in March to learn more about what is going on in Europe.
>         *       The U.S. is very fragmented and more likely
> industry-driven in most areas of adoption. But the uptake of mobile
> driver's license in the U.S. is bringing digital credentials to the
> mainstream attention. The challenge in the U.S. (or North America in
> general) is the near-term (business) value for adopting VCs and DIDs, but
> we are seeing more and more promising implementations of VCs and DIDs that
> are meeting where the market is today and demonstrating enough value to
> sustain and advance the implementations. This helps the decentralized
> identity space to be more market/value-driven and converge around the
> common business values.
>         *       What makes APAC, MENA, and many other developing
> countries/regions unique is their lack of legacy technology infrastructure,
> which means they may encounter one less barrier to adopting new technology.
> The lack of resources in some of those regions also require technology
> implementations to be super practical as well. Bhutan <
> https://www.bhutanndi.com/>  made a strong case through its National
> Digital Identity <https://www.bhutanndi.com/> . There are many other
> interesting geopolitical and economic dynamics in those regions that are
> worth looking into when evaluating the potential of technology adoption,
> which I won't dive into here.
>
> *       Distinction between solution providers and actual use case
> leaders: Solution providers are playing a critical role in defining
> standards and accelerating adoption of standards, but there is an important
> distinction to make between solution providers and those they are
> implementing solutions for (the actual use case leaders). Hearing directly
> from those paying for real-world implementations can offer valuable
> perspective and insights into adoption level and technology maturity, which
> may (or may not) differ from what you learn from solution providers.
>
>         I would like to name a Canadian solution provider,
> Mavennet/Neoflow <https://www.mavennet.com/> , which I didn't see in the
> landscape. They are doing critical work in the energy supply chain space
> and also a part of the DHS SVIP cohort. Our newest CCG chair Mahmoud is the
> Director of Engineering at Mavennet.
>
>
> Thanks again for keeping the community updated about the important work at
> GS1 and sharing valuable resources. Hope to hear more about your upcoming
> work at IIW.
>
> Best,
> Lucy
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 8:29 AM MXS Insights <mxsinsights@gmail.com
> <mailto:mxsinsights@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>
>         Hi Phil,
>
>         This is very good news.
>
>         I completely understand the measured approach, this kind of change
> can bring a lot of cultural resistance and a methodical approach brings
> people along versus running them over.
>
>         Cheers!
>
>         Michael Shea
>
>
>
>
>
>                 On Feb 11, 2025, at 1:39 PM, Phil Archer <
> phil.archer@gs1.org <mailto:phil.archer@gs1.org> > wrote:
>
>                 Dear all,
>
>                 I am acutely aware that I and my GS1 colleagues have been
> almost entirely absent from the standards development work around DIDs and
> VCs for over a year. I can only apologise.
>
>                 However, the topic has been discussed and considered at
> our senior level and I wanted to share the positive output of those
> discussions here.
>
>                 First of all, GS1 itself is unknown to almost everyone so
> a quick intro: we're the organization behind the barcode (evil
> federated/issued identifiers, boo!!). Alongside our identifiers that appear
> in 1 and 2D optical symbols and RFID tags there's a catalogue of standards
> related to supply chains and related business processes.
>
>                 So... VCs are obviously a good fit for our work. We hired
> two consultants whose task was to recommend what, if anything, we should
> do. The cut a long story short:
>
>                 1. The reasons why we *should* implement VCs in some way
> are compelling.
>
>                 2. The reasons why we *should not* implement VCs are also
> strong.
>
>                 One of the documents created during this process was a
> survey of the tech landscape which we have just published at
> https://ref.gs1.org/docs/2025/VCs-and-DIDs-tech-landscape. Some of you
> will know its author, Ira Bolychevsky.
>
>                 Following this work, GS1 is committed to taking small
> steps with VCs. Some of our GS1 Member Organisations (such as GS1 US, GS1
> Netherlands and others) will be able to issue a VC proving that a GS1
> identifier is licensed by a company we know. GS1 Global Office will act as
> a root of trust. This will be consistent with things like the UN
> Transparency Protocol.
>
>                 However, as I say, there were also reasons for caution.
> Therefore, we will wait and see the take up and reaction to our minimal
> steps (what we call 'Crawl') before making a decision on whether to invest
> in 'Walk', let alone 'Run'. This means that we are not yet ready to commit
> to make it a normal part of every GS1 Member Organisation's operation. That
> is my hope and expectation, but if we're to make that kind of commitment,
> we need compelling evidence that, today, isn't quite there.
>
>                 We have a lot of work ahead of us even for 'Crawl' but the
> journey has begun and I hope it will prove to be an important use of the
> technology that people here have worked so hard to create.
>
>                 Thank you
>
>                 Phil
>
>                 ---
>
>                 Phil Archer
>                 Web Solutions Director, GS1
>                 https://www.gs1.org
>
>                 https://philarcher.org
>                 +44 (0)7887 767755
>                 @philarcher.bsky.social
>
>                 CONFIDENTIALITY / DISCLAIMER: The contents of this e-mail
> are  confidential and are not to be regarded as a contractual offer or
> acceptance from GS1 (registered in Belgium).
>                 If you are not the addressee, or if this has been copied
> or sent to you in error, you must not use data herein for any purpose, you
> must delete it, and should inform the sender.
>                 GS1 disclaims liability for accuracy or completeness, and
> opinions expressed are those of the author alone.
>                 GS1 may monitor communications.
>                 Third party rights acknowledged.
>                 (c) 2020.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY / DISCLAIMER: The contents of this e-mail are
> confidential and are not to be regarded as a contractual offer or
> acceptance from GS1 (registered in Belgium).
> If you are not the addressee, or if this has been copied or sent to you in
> error, you must not use data herein for any purpose, you must delete it,
> and should inform the sender.
> GS1 disclaims liability for accuracy or completeness, and opinions
> expressed are those of the author alone.
> GS1 may monitor communications.
> Third party rights acknowledged.
> (c) 2020.
>