Stefaan Verhulst
Paper by Sarah Ahannach et al: “Women’s health research is receiving increasing attention globally, but considerable knowledge gaps remain. Across many fields of research, active involvement of citizens in science has emerged as a promising strategy to help align scientific research with societal needs. Citizen science offers researchers the opportunity for large-scale sampling and data acquisition while engaging the public in a co-creative approach that solicits their input on study aims, research design, data gathering and analysis. Here, we argue that citizen science has the potential to generate new data and insights that advance women’s health. Based on our experience with the international Isala project, which used a citizen-science approach to study the female microbiome and its influence on health, we address key challenges and lessons for generating a holistic, community-centered approach to women’s health research. We advocate for interdisciplinary collaborations to fully leverage citizen science in women’s health toward a more inclusive research landscape that amplifies underrepresented voices, challenges taboos around intimate health topics and prioritizes women’s involvement in shaping health research agendas…(More)”.
Paper by Lukas Fuchs: “Adding an option is a neglected mechanism for bringing about behavioural change. This mechanism is distinct from nudges, which are changes in the choice architecture, and instead makes it possible to pursue republican paternalism, a unique form of paternalism in which choices are changed by expanding people’s set of options. I argue that this is truly a form of paternalism (albeit a relatively soft one) and illustrate some of its manifestations in public policy, specifically public options and market creation. Furthermore, I compare it with libertarian paternalism on several dimensions, namely respect for individuals’ agency, effectiveness, and efficiency. Finally, I consider whether policymakers have the necessary knowledge to successfully change behaviour by adding options. Given that adding an option has key advantages over nudges in most if not all of these dimensions, it should be considered indispensable in the behavioural policymaker’s toolbox…(More)”.
Article by Debra Lam: “Cities tackle a vast array of responsibilities – from building transit networks to running schools – and sometimes they can use a little help. That’s why local governments have long teamed up with businesses in so-called public-private partnerships. Historically, these arrangements have helped cities fund big infrastructure projects such as bridges and hospitals.
However, our analysis and research show an emerging trend with local governments engaged in private-sector collaborations – what we have come to describe as “community-centered, public-private partnerships,” or CP3s. Unlike traditional public-private partnerships, CP3s aren’t just about financial investments; they leverage relationships and trust. And they’re about more than just building infrastructure; they’re about building resilient and inclusive communities.
As the founding executive director of the Partnership for Inclusive Innovation, based out of the Georgia Institute of Technology, I’m fascinated with CP3s. And while not all CP3s are successful, when done right they offer local governments a powerful tool to navigate the complexities of modern urban life.
Together with international climate finance expert Andrea Fernández of the urban climate leadership group C40, we analyzed community-centered, public-private partnerships across the world and put together eight case studies. Together, they offer valuable insights into how cities can harness the power of CP3s.
4 keys to success
Although we looked at partnerships forged in different countries and contexts, we saw several elements emerge as critical to success over and over again.
• 1. Clear mission and vision: It’s essential to have a mission that resonates with everyone involved. Ruta N in Medellín, Colombia, for example, transformed the city into a hub of innovation, attracting 471 technology companies and creating 22,500 jobs.
This vision wasn’t static. It evolved in response to changing local dynamics, including leadership priorities and broader global trends. However, the core mission of entrepreneurship, investment and innovation remained clear and was embraced by all key stakeholders, driving the partnership forward.
2. Diverse and engaged partners: Successful CP3s rely on the active involvement of a wide range of partners, each bringing their unique expertise and resources to the table. In the U.K., for example, the Hull net-zero climate initiative featured a partnership that included more than 150 companies, many small and medium-size. This diversity of partners was crucial to the initiative’s success because they could leverage resources and share risks, enabling it to address complex challenges from multiple angles.
Similarly, Malaysia’s Think City engaged community-based organizations and vulnerable populations in its Penang climate adaptation program. This ensured that the partnership was inclusive and responsive to the needs of all citizens…(More)”.
Paper by Steven Bird: “How do we roll out language technologies across a world with 7,000 languages? In one story, we scale the successes of NLP further into ‘low-resource’ languages, doing ever more with less. However, this approach does not recognise the fact that – beyond the 500 institutional languages – the remaining languages are oral vernaculars. These speech communities interact with the outside world using a ‘con-
tact language’. I argue that contact languages are the appropriate target for technologies like speech recognition and machine translation, and that the 6,500 oral vernaculars should be approached differently. I share stories from an Indigenous community where local people reshaped an extractive agenda to align with their relational agenda. I describe the emerging paradigm of Relational NLP and explain how it opens the way to non-extractive methods and to solutions that enhance human agency…(More)”
Report by the World Economic Forum: “AI agents are autonomous systems capable of sensing, learning and acting upon their environments. This white paper explores their development and looks at how they are linked to recent advances in large language and multimodal models. It highlights how AI agents can enhance efficiency across sectors including healthcare, education and finance.
Tracing their evolution from simple rule-based programmes to sophisticated entities with complex decision-making abilities, the paper discusses both the benefits and the risks associated with AI agents. Ethical considerations such as transparency and accountability are emphasized, highlighting the need for robust governance frameworks and cross-sector collaboration.
By understanding the opportunities and challenges that AI agents present, stakeholders can responsibly leverage these systems to drive innovation, improve practices and enhance quality of life. This primer serves as a valuable resource for anyone seeking to gain a better grasp of this rapidly advancing field…(More)”.
Paper by the Centre for Information Policy Leadership: “Contemporary everyday life is increasingly permeated by digital information, whether by creating, consuming or depending on it. Most of our professional and private lives now rely to a large degree on digital interactions. As a result, access to and the use of data, and in particular personal data, are key elements and drivers of the digital economy and society. This has brought us to a significant inflection point on the issue of legitimising the processing of personal data in the wide range of contexts that are essential to our data-driven, AI-enabled digital products and services. The time has come to seriously re-consider the status of consent as a privileged legal basis and to consider alternatives that are better suited for a wide range of essential data processing contexts. The most prominent among these alternatives are the “legitimate interest” and “contractual necessity” legal bases, which have found an equivalent in a number of jurisdictions. One example is Singapore, where revisions to their data protection framework include a legitimate interest exemption…(More)”.
Article by David Spiegelhalter: “Life is uncertain. None of us know what is going to happen. We know little of what has happened in the past, or is happening now outside our immediate experience. Uncertainty has been called the ‘conscious awareness of ignorance’1 — be it of the weather tomorrow, the next Premier League champions, the climate in 2100 or the identity of our ancient ancestors.
In daily life, we generally express uncertainty in words, saying an event “could”, “might” or “is likely to” happen (or have happened). But uncertain words can be treacherous. When, in 1961, the newly elected US president John F. Kennedy was informed about a CIA-sponsored plan to invade communist Cuba, he commissioned an appraisal from his military top brass. They concluded that the mission had a 30% chance of success — that is, a 70% chance of failure. In the report that reached the president, this was rendered as “a fair chance”. The Bay of Pigs invasion went ahead, and was a fiasco. There are now established scales for converting words of uncertainty into rough numbers. Anyone in the UK intelligence community using the term ‘likely’, for example, should mean a chance of between 55% and 75% (see go.nature.com/3vhu5zc).
Attempts to put numbers on chance and uncertainty take us into the mathematical realm of probability, which today is used confidently in any number of fields. Open any science journal, for example, and you’ll find papers liberally sprinkled with P values, confidence intervals and possibly Bayesian posterior distributions, all of which are dependent on probability.
And yet, any numerical probability, I will argue — whether in a scientific paper, as part of weather forecasts, predicting the outcome of a sports competition or quantifying a health risk — is not an objective property of the world, but a construction based on personal or collective judgements and (often doubtful) assumptions. Furthermore, in most circumstances, it is not even estimating some underlying ‘true’ quantity. Probability, indeed, can only rarely be said to ‘exist’ at all…(More)”.
Article by Emilio Mariscal: “…After some exploration, I came up with an idea: what if we could export chat conversations and extract the location data along with the associated messages? The solution would involve a straightforward application where users can upload their exported chats and instantly generate a map displaying all shared locations and messages. No business accounts or complex integrations would be required—just a simple, ready-to-use tool from day one.
ChatMap —chatmap.hotosm.org — is a straightforward and simple mapping solution that leverages WhatsApp, an application used by 2.78 billion people worldwide. Its simplicity and accessibility make it an effective tool for communities with limited technical knowledge. And it even works offline! as it relies on the GPS signal for location, sending all data with the phone to gather connectivity.
This solution provides complete independence, as it does not require users to adopt a technology that depends on third-party maintenance. It’s a simple data flow with an equally straightforward script that can be improved by anyone interested on GitHub.
We’re already using it! Recently, as part of a community mapping project to assess the risks in the slopes of Comuna 8 in Medellín, an area vulnerable to repeated flooding, a group of students and local collectives collaborated with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap (HOT) to map areas affected by landslides and other disaster impacts. This initiative facilitated the identification and characterization of settlements, supporting humanitarian aid efforts.
Photo by Daniela Arbeláez Suárez (source: WhatsApp)
As shown in the picture, the community explored the area on foot, using their phones to take photos and notes, and shared them along with the location. It was incredibly simple!
The data gathered during this activity was transformed 20 minutes later (once getting access to a WIFI network) into a map, which was then uploaded to our online platform powered by uMap (umap.hotosm.org)…(More)”.
See more at https://umap.hotosm.org/en/map/unaula-mapea-con-whatsapp_38
Article by Stefaan Verhulst and Adam Zable: “Non-Traditional Data (NTD): “data that is digitally captured (e.g. mobile phone records), mediated (e.g. social media), or observed (e.g. satellite imagery), using new instrumentation mechanisms, often privately held.”
Digitalization and the resulting datafication have introduced a new category of data that, when re-used responsibly, can complement traditional data in addressing public interest questions—from public health to environmental conservation. Unlocking these often privately held datasets through data collaboratives is a key focus of what we have called The Third Wave of Open Data.
To help bridge this gap, we have curated below recent examples of the use of NTD for research and decision-making that were published the past few months. They are organized into five categories:
- Health and Well-being;
- Humanitarian Aid;
- Environment and Climate;
- Urban Systems and Mobility, and
- Economic and Labor Dynamics…(More)”.
Article by Stefaan Verhulst: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times… It was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” –Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities
Charles Dickens’s famous line captures the contradictions of the present moment in the world of data. On the one hand, data has become central to addressing humanity’s most pressing challenges — climate change, healthcare, economic development, public policy, and scientific discovery. On the other hand, despite the unprecedented quantity of data being generated, significant obstacles remain to accessing and reusing it. As our digital ecosystems evolve, including the rapid advances in artificial intelligence, we find ourselves both on the verge of a golden era of open data and at risk of slipping deeper into a restrictive “data winter.”
These two realities are concurrent: the challenges posed by growing restrictions on data reuse, and the countervailing potential brought by advancements in privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs), synthetic data, and data commons approaches. It argues that while current trends toward closed data ecosystems threaten innovation, new technologies and frameworks could lead to a “Fourth Wave of Open Data,” potentially ushering in a new era of data accessibility and collaboration…(More)” (First Published in Industry Data for Society Partnership’s (IDSP) 2024 Year in Review).