The Power of Supercitizens

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Brian Klaas: “Lurking among us, there are a group of hidden heroes, people who routinely devote significant amounts of their time, energy, and talent to making our communities better. These are the devoted, do-gooding, elite one percent. Most, but not all, are volunteers.1 All are selfless altruists. They, the supercitizens, provide some of the stickiness in the social glue that holds us together.2

What if I told you that there’s this little trick you can do that makes your community stronger, helps other people, and makes you happier and live longer? Well, it exists, there’s ample evidence it works, and best of all, it’s free.

Recently published research showcases a convincing causal link between these supercitizens—devoted, regular volunteers—and social cohesion. While such an umbrella term means a million different things, these researchers focused on two UK-based surveys that analyzed three facets of social cohesion, measured through eight questions (respondents answered on a five point scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree). They were:

Neighboring

  • ‘If I needed advice about something I could go to someone in my neighborhood’;
  • ‘I borrow things and exchange favors with my neighbors’; and
  • ‘I regularly stop and talk with people in my neighborhood’

Psychological sense of community

  • ‘I feel like I belong to this neighborhood’;
  • ‘The friendships and associations I have with other people in my neighborhood mean a lot to me’;
  • ‘I would be willing to work together with others on something to improve my neighborhood’; and
  • ‘I think of myself as similar to the people that live in this neighborhood’)

Attraction to the neighborhood

  • ‘I plan to remain a resident of this neighborhood for a number of years’

While these questions only tap into some specific components of social cohesion, high levels of these ingredients are likely to produce a reliable recipe for a healthy local community. (Social cohesion differs from social capital, popularized by Robert Putnam and his book, Bowling Alone. Social capital tends to focus on links between individuals and groups—are you a joiner or more of a loner?—whereas cohesion refers to a more diffuse sense of community, belonging, and neighborliness)…(More)”.

Policy for responsible use of AI in government

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Policy by the Australian Government: “The Policy for the responsible use of AI in government ensures that government plays a leadership role in embracing AI for the benefit of Australians while ensuring its safe, ethical and responsible use, in line with community expectations. The policy:

  • provides a unified approach for government to engage with AI confidently, safely and responsibly, and realise its benefits
  • aims to strengthen public trust in government’s use of AI by providing enhanced transparency, governance and risk assurance
  • aims to embed a forward leaning, adaptive approach for government’s use of AI that is designed to evolve and develop over time…(More)”.

Policy Fit for the Future

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Primer by the Australian Government: “The Futures Primer is part of the “Policy Fit for the Future” project, building Australian Public Service capability to use futures techniques in policymaking through horizon scanning, visioning and scenario planning. These tools help anticipate and navigate future risks and opportunities.

The tools and advice can be adapted to any policy challenge, and reflect the views of global experts in futures and strategic foresight, both within and outside the APS…The Futures Primer offers a range of flexible tools and advice that can be adapted to any policy challenge. It reflects the views of global experts in futures and strategic foresight, both within and outside the APS…(More)”.

The Power of Volunteers: Remote Mapping Gaza and Strategies in Conflict Areas

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Jessica Pechmann: “…In Gaza, increased conflict since October 2023 has caused a prolonged humanitarian crisis. Understanding the impact of the conflict on buildings has been challenging, since pre-existing datasets from artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) models and OSM were not accurate enough to create a full building footprint baseline. The area’s buildings were too dense, and information on the ground was impossible to collect safely. In these hard-to-reach areas, HOT’s remote and crowdsourced mapping methodology was a good fit for collecting detailed information visible on aerial imagery.

In February 2024, after consultation with humanitarian and UN actors working in Gaza, HOT decided to create a pre-conflict dataset of all building footprints in the area in OSM. HOT’s community of OpenStreetMap volunteers did all the data work, coordinating through HOT’s Tasking Manager. The volunteers made meticulous edits to add missing data and to improve existing data. Due to protection and data quality concerns, only expert volunteer teams were assigned to map and validate the area. As in other areas that are hard to reach due to conflict, HOT balanced the data needs with responsible data practices based on the context.

Comparing AI/ML with human-verified OSM building datasets in conflict zones

AI/ML is becoming an increasingly common and quick way to obtain building footprints across large areas. Sources for automated building footprints range from worldwide datasets by Microsoft or Google to smaller-scale open community-managed tools such as HOT’s new application, fAIr.

Now that HOT volunteers have completely updated and validated all OSM buildings in visible imagery pre-conflict, OSM has 18% more individual buildings in the Gaza strip than Microsoft’s ML buildings dataset (estimated 330,079 buildings vs 280,112 buildings). However, in contexts where there has not been a coordinated update effort in OSM, the numbers may differ. For example, in Sudan where there has not been a large organized editing campaign, there are just under 1,500,000 in OSM, compared to over 5,820,000 buildings in Microsoft’s ML data. It is important to note that the ML datasets have not been human-verified and their accuracy is not known. Google Open Buildings has over 26 million building features in Sudan, but on visual inspection, many of these features are noise in the data that the model incorrectly identified as buildings in the uninhabited desert…(More)”.

Under which conditions can civic monitoring be admitted as a source of evidence in courts?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Anna Berti Suman: “The ‘Sensing for Justice’ (SensJus) research project – running between 2020 and 2023 – explored how people use monitoring technologies or just their senses to gather evidence of environmental issues and claim environmental justice in a variety of fora. Among the other research lines, we looked at successful and failed cases of civic-gathered data introduced in courts. The guiding question was: what are the enabling factors and/or barriers for the introduction of civic evidence in environmental litigation?

Civic environmental monitoring is the use by ordinary people of monitoring devices (e.g., a sensor) or their bare senses (e.g., smell, hearing) to detect environmental issues. It can be regarded as a form of reaction to environmental injustices, a form of political contestation through data and even as a form of collective care. The practice is fast growing, especially thanks to the widespread availability of audio and video-recording devices in the hand of diverse publics, but also due to the increase in public literacy and concern on environmental matters.

Civic monitoring can be a powerful source of evidence for law enforcement, especially when it sheds light on official informational gaps associated with the shortages of public agencies’ resources to detect environmental wrongdoings. Both legal scholars and practitioners as well as civil society organizations and institutional actors should look at the practice and its potential applications with attention.

Among the cases explored for the SensJus project, the Formosa case, Texas, United States, stands out as it sets a key precedent: issued in June 2019, the landmark ruling found a Taiwanese petrochemical company liable for violating the US Clean Water Act, mostly on the basis of citizen-collected evidence involving volunteer observations of plastic contamination over years. The contamination could not be proven through existing data held by competent authorities because the company never filed any record of pollution. Our analysis of the case highlights some key determinants of the case’s success…(More)”.

Data Protection Law and Emotion

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Damian Clifford: “Data protection law is often positioned as a regulatory solution to the risks posed by computational systems. Despite the widespread adoption of data protection laws, however, there are those who remain sceptical as to their capacity to engender change. Much of this criticism focuses on our role as ‘data subjects’. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that we lack the capacity to act in our own best interests and, what is more, that our decisions have negative impacts on others. Our decision-making limitations seem to be the inevitable by-product of the technological, social, and economic reality. Data protection law bakes in these limitations by providing frameworks for notions such as consent and subjective control rights and by relying on those who process our data to do so fairly.

Despite these valid concerns, Data Protection Law and Emotion argues that the (in)effectiveness of these laws are often more difficult to discern than the critical literature would suggest, while also emphasizing the importance of the conceptual value of subjective control. These points are explored (and indeed, exposed) by investigating data protection law through the lens of the insights provided by law and emotion scholarship and demonstrating the role emotions play in our decision-making. The book uses the development of Emotional Artificial Intelligence, a particularly controversial technology, as a case study to analyse these issues.

Original and insightful, Data Protection Law and Emotion offers a unique contribution to a contentious debate that will appeal to students and academics in data protection and privacy, policymakers, practitioners, and regulators…(More)”.

Relational ethics in health care automation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Frances Shaw and Anthony McCosker: “Despite the transformative potential of automation and clinical decision support technology in health care, there is growing urgency for more nuanced approaches to ethics. Relational ethics is an approach that can guide the responsible use of a range of automated decision-making systems including the use of generative artificial intelligence and large language models as they affect health care relationships. 

There is an urgent need for sector-wide training and scrutiny regarding the effects of automation using relational ethics touchstones, such as patient-centred health care, informed consent, patient autonomy, shared decision-making, empathy and the politics of care.

The purpose of this review is to offer a provocation for health care practitioners, managers and policy makers to consider the use automated tools in practice settings and examine how these tools might affect relationships and hence care outcomes…(More)”.

Modeling Cities and Regions as Complex Systems

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Roger White, Guy Engelen and Inge Uljee: “Cities and regions grow (or occasionally decline), and continuously transform themselves as they do so. This book describes the theory and practice of modeling the spatial dynamics of urban growth and transformation. As cities are complex, adaptive, self-organizing systems, the most appropriate modeling framework is one based on the theory of self-organizing systems—an approach already used in such fields as physics and ecology. The book presents a series of models, most of them developed using cellular automata (CA), which are inherently spatial and computationally efficient. It also provides discussions of the theoretical, methodological, and philosophical issues that arise from the models. A case study illustrates the use of these models in urban and regional planning. Finally, the book presents a new, dynamic theory of urban spatial structure that emerges from the models and their applications.

The models are primarily land use models, but the more advanced ones also show the dynamics of population and economic activities, and are integrated with models in other domains such as economics, demography, and transportation. The result is a rich and realistic representation of the spatial dynamics of a variety of urban phenomena. The book is unique in its coverage of both the general issues associated with complex self-organizing systems and the specifics of designing and implementing models of such systems…(More)”.

Constructing Valid Geospatial Tools for Environmental Justice

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: “Decades of research have shown that the most disadvantaged communities exist at the intersection of high levels of hazard exposure, racial and ethnic marginalization, and poverty.

Mapping and geographical information systems have been crucial for analyzing the environmental burdens of marginalized communities, and several federal and state geospatial tools have emerged to help address environmental justice concerns — such as the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool developed in 2022 in response to Justice40 initiatives from the Biden administration.

Constructing Valid Geospatial Tools for Environmental Justice, a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, offers recommendations for developing environmental justice tools that reflect the experiences of the communities they measure.

The report recommends data strategies focused on community engagement, validation, and documentation. It emphasizes using a structured development process and offers guidance for selecting and assessing indicators, integrating indicators, and incorporating cumulative impact scoring. Tool developers should choose measures of economic burden beyond the federal poverty level that account for additional dimensions of wealth and geographic variations in cost of living. They should also use indicators that measure the impacts of racism in policies and practices that have led to current disparities…(More)”.

Governing mediation in the data ecosystem: lessons from media governance for overcoming data asymmetries

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Chapter by Stefaan Verhulst in Handbook of Media and Communication Governance edited by Manuel Puppis , Robin Mansell , and Hilde Van den Bulck: “The internet and the accompanying datafication were heralded to usher in a golden era of disintermediation. Instead, the modern data ecology witnessed a process of remediation, or ‘hyper-mediation’, resulting in governance challenges, many of which underlie broader socioeconomic difficulties. Particularly, the rise of data asymmetries and silos create new forms of scarcity and dominance with deleterious political, economic and cultural consequences. Responding to these challenges requires a new data governance framework, focused on unlocking data and developing a more data pluralistic ecosystem. We argue for regulation and policy focused on promoting data collaboratives, an emerging form of cross-sectoral partnership; and on the establishment of data stewards, individuals/groups tasked with managing and responsibly sharing organizations’ data assets. Some regulatory steps are discussed, along with the various ways in which these two emerging stakeholders can help alleviate data scarcities and their associated problems…(More)”