Paper by Julie Battilana, Christine M. Beckman, and Julie Yen: “As threats to democracy endanger the rights and freedoms of people around the world, scholars are increasingly interrogating the role that organizations play in shaping democratic and authoritarian societies. Just as societies can be more or less democratic, so, too, can organizations. This essay, in honor of ASQ’s 70th volume, argues for a deeper focus in organizational research on the extent to which organizations themselves are democratic and the outcomes associated with these varied models of organizing. First, we provide a framework for considering the extent to which organizations are democratically organized, accounting for the varied ways in which workers can participate in their organizations. Second, we call for research on the outcomes associated with democratic organizing at both the organizational and societal levels. We build from research arguing that the extent to which workers participate in organizational decision making can spill over to impact their expectations of and participation in civic life. Moving forward, we argue it is critical to recognize that questions of democracy and authoritarianism concern not only the political contexts in which organizations are embedded but also how organizations themselves are structured and contribute to society…(More)”
Panels giving scientific advice to Census Bureau disbanded by Trump administration
Article by Jeffrey Mervis: “…U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has disbanded five outside panels that provide scientific and community advice to the U.S. Census Bureau and other federal statistical agencies just as preparations are ramping up for the country’s next decennial census, in 2030.
The dozens of demographers, statisticians, and public members on the five panels received nearly identical letters this week telling them that “the Secretary of Commerce has determined that the purposes for which the [committee] was established have been fulfilled, and the committee has been terminated effective February 28, 2025. Thank you for your service.”
Statistician Robert Santos, who last month resigned as Census Bureau director 3 years into his 5-year term, says he’s “terribly disappointed but not surprised” by the move, noting how a recent directive by President Donald Trump on gender identity has disrupted data collection for a host of federal surveys…(More)”.
New AI Collaboratives to take action on wildfires and food insecurity
Google: “…last September we introduced AI Collaboratives, a new funding approach designed to unite public, private and nonprofit organizations, and researchers, to create AI-powered solutions to help people around the world.
Today, we’re sharing more about our first two focus areas for AI Collaboratives: Wildfires and Food Security.
Wildfires are a global crisis, claiming more than 300,000 lives due to smoke exposure annually and causing billions of dollars in economic damage. …Google.org has convened more than 15 organizations, including Earth Fire Alliance and Moore Foundation, to help in this important effort. By coordinating funding and integrating cutting-edge science, emerging technology and on-the-ground applications, we can provide collaborators with the tools they need to identify and track wildfires in near real time; quantify wildfire risk; shift more acreage to beneficial fires; and ultimately reduce the damage caused by catastrophic wildfires.
Nearly one-third of the world’s population faces moderate or severe food insecurity due to extreme weather, conflict and economic shocks. The AI Collaborative: Food Security will strengthen the resilience of global food systems and improve food security for the world’s most vulnerable populations through AI technologies, collaborative research, data-sharing and coordinated action. To date, 10 organizations have joined us in this effort, and we’ll share more updates soon…(More)”.
Expanding the Horizons of Collective Artificial Intelligence (CAI): From Individual Nudges to Relational Cognition
Blog by Evelien Verschroeven: “As AI continues to evolve, it is essential to move beyond focusing solely on individual behavior changes. The individual input — whether through behavior, data, or critical content — remains important. New data and fresh perspectives are necessary for AI to continue learning, growing, and improving its relevance. However, as we head into what some are calling the golden years of AI, it’s critical to acknowledge a potential challenge: within five years, it is predicted that 50% of AI-generated content will be based on AI-created material, creating a risk of inbreeding where AI learns from itself, rather than from the diversity of human experience and knowledge.
Platforms like Google’s AI for Social Good and Unanimous AI’s Swarm play pivotal roles in breaking this cycle. By encouraging the aggregation of real-world data, they add new content that can influence and shape AI’s evolution. While they focus on individual data contributions, they also help keep AI systems grounded in real-world scenarios, ensuring that the content remains critical and diverse.
However, human oversight is key. AI systems, even with the best intentions, are still learning from patterns that humans provide. It’s essential that AI continues to receive diverse human input, so that its understanding remains grounded in real-world perspectives. AI should be continuously checked and guided by human creativity, critical thinking, and social contexts, to ensure that it doesn’t become isolated or too self-referential.
As we continue advancing AI, it is crucial to embrace relational cognition and collective intelligence. This approach will allow AI to address both individual and collective needs, enhancing not only personal development but also strengthening social bonds and fostering more resilient, adaptive communities…(More)”.
An immersive technologies policy primer
OECD Policy Primer: “Immersive technologies, such as augmented reality, digital twins and virtual worlds, offer innovative ways to interact with information and the environment by engaging one’s senses. This paper explores potential benefits of these technologies, from innovative commercial applications to addressing societal challenges. It also highlights potential risks, such as extensive data collection, mental or physical risks from misuse, and emerging cyber threats. It outlines policy opportunities and challenges in maximising these benefits while mitigating risks, with real-world use cases in areas like remote healthcare and education for people with disabilities. The paper emphasises the critical role of anticipatory governance and international collaboration in shaping the human-centric and values-based development and use of immersive technologies…(More)”.
Large AI models are cultural and social technologies
Essay by Henry Farrell, Alison Gopnik, Cosma Shalizi, and James Evans: “Debates about artificial intelligence (AI) tend to revolve around whether large models are intelligent, autonomous agents. Some AI researchers and commentators speculate that we are on the cusp of creating agents with artificial general intelligence (AGI), a prospect anticipated with both elation and anxiety. There have also been extensive conversations about cultural and social consequences of large models, orbiting around two foci: immediate effects of these systems as they are currently used, and hypothetical futures when these systems turn into AGI agents perhaps even superintelligent AGI agents.
But this discourse about large models as intelligent agents is fundamentally misconceived. Combining ideas from social and behavioral sciences with computer science can help us understand AI systems more accurately. Large Models should not be viewed primarily as intelligent agents, but as a new kind of cultural and social technology, allowing humans to take advantage of information other humans have accumulated.
The new technology of large models combines important features of earlier technologies. Like pictures, writing, print, video, Internet search, and other such technologies, large models allow people to access information that other people have created. Large Models – currently language, vision, and multi-modal depend on the fact that the Internet has made the products of these earlier technologies readily available in machine-readable form. But like economic markets, state bureaucracies, and other social technologies, these systems not only make information widely available, they allow it to be reorganized, transformed, and restructured in distinctive ways. Adopting Herbert Simon’s terminology, large models are a new variant of the “artificial systems of human society” that process information to enable large-scale coordination…(More)”
Bridging Digital Divides: How PescaData is Connecting Small-Scale Fishing Cooperatives to the Blue Economy
Article by Stuart Fulton: “In this research project, we examine how digital platforms – specifically PescaData – can be leveraged to connect small-scale fishing cooperatives with impact investors and donors, creating new pathways for sustainable blue economy financing, while simultaneously ensuring fair data practices that respect data sovereignty and traditional ecological knowledge.
PescaData emerged as a pioneering digital platform that enables fishing communities to collect more accurate data to ensure sustainable fisheries. Since then, PescaData has evolved to provide software as a service to fishing cooperatives and to allow fishers to document their solutions to environmental and economic challenges. Since 2022, small-scale fishers have used it to document nearly 300 initiatives that contribute to multiple Sustainable Development Goals.
Respecting Data Sovereignty in the Digital Age
One critical aspect of our research acknowledges the unique challenges of implementing digital tools in traditional cooperative settings. Unlike conventional tech implementations that often extract value from communities, PescaData´s approach centers on data sovereignty – the principle that fishing communities should maintain ownership and control over their data. As the PescaData case study demonstrates, a humanity-centric rather than merely user-centric approach is essential. This means designing with compassion and establishing clear governance around data from the very beginning. The data generated by fishing cooperatives represents not just information, but traditional knowledge accumulated over generations of resource management.
The fishers themselves have articulated clear principles for data governance in a cooperative model:
- Ownership: Fishers, as data producers, decide who has access and under what conditions.
- Transparency: Clear agreements on data use.
- Knowledge assessment: Highlighting fishers’ contributions and placing them in decision-making positions.
- Co-design: Ensuring the platform meets their specific needs.
- Security: Protecting collected data…(More)”.
Government data is disappearing before our eyes
Article by Anna Massoglia: “A battle is being waged in the quiet corners of government websites and data repositories. Essential public records are disappearing and, with them, Americans’ ability to hold those in power accountable.
Take the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk’s federal cost-cutting initiative. Touted as “maximally transparent,” DOGE is supposed to make government spending more efficient. But when journalists and researchers exposed major errors — from double-counting contracts to conflating caps with actual spending — DOGE didn’t fix the mistakes. Instead, it made them harder to detect.
Many Americans hoped DOGE’s work would be a step toward cutting costs and restoring trust in government. But trust must be earned. If our leaders truly want to restore faith in our institutions, they must ensure that facts remain available to everyone, not just when convenient.
Since Jan. 20, public records across the federal government have been erased. Economic indicators that guide investments, scientific datasets that drive medical breakthroughs, federal health guidelines and historical archives that inform policy decisions have all been put on the chopping block. Some missing datasets have been restored but are incomplete or have unexplained changes, rendering them unreliable.
Both Republican and Democratic administrations have played a role in limiting public access to government records. But the scale and speed of the Trump administration’s data manipulation — combined with buyouts, resignations and other restructuring across federal agencies — signal a new phase in the war on public information. This is not just about deleting files, it’s about controlling what the public sees, shaping the narrative and limiting accountability.
The Trump administration is accelerating this trend with revisions to official records. Unelected advisors are overseeing a sweeping reorganization of federal data, granting entities like DOGE unprecedented access to taxpayer records with little oversight. This is not just a bureaucratic reshuffle — it is a fundamental reshaping of the public record.
The consequences of data manipulation extend far beyond politics. When those in power control the flow of information, they can dictate collective truth. Governments that manipulate information are not just rewriting statistics — they are rewriting history.
From authoritarian regimes that have erased dissent to leaders who have fabricated economic numbers to maintain their grip on power, the dangers of suppressing and distorting data are well-documented.
Misleading or inconsistent data can be just as dangerous as opacity. When hard facts are replaced with political spin, conspiracy theories take root and misinformation fills the void.
The fact that data suppression and manipulation has occurred before does not lessen the danger, but underscores the urgency of taking proactive measures to safeguard transparency. A missing statistic today can become a missing historical fact tomorrow. Over time, that can reshape our reality…(More)”.
Can small language models revitalize Indigenous languages?
Article by Brooke Tanner and Cameron F. Kerry: “Indigenous languages play a critical role in preserving cultural identity and transmitting unique worldviews, traditions, and knowledge, but at least 40% of the world’s 6,700 languages are currently endangered. The United Nations declared 2022-2032 as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages to draw attention to this threat, in hopes of supporting the revitalization of these languages and preservation of access to linguistic resources.
Building on the advantages of SLMs, several initiatives have successfully adapted these models specifically for Indigenous languages. Such Indigenous language models (ILMs) represent a subset of SLMs that are designed, trained, and fine-tuned with input from the communities they serve.
Case studies and applications
- Meta released No Language Left Behind (NLLB-200), a 54 billion–parameter open-source machine translation model that supports 200 languages as part of Meta’s universal speech translator project. The model includes support for languages with limited translation resources. While the model’s breadth of languages included is novel, NLLB-200 can struggle to capture the intricacies of local context for low-resource languages and often relies on machine-translated sentence pairs across the internet due to the scarcity of digitized monolingual data.
- Lelapa AI’s InkubaLM-0.4B is an SLM with applications for low-resource African languages. Trained on 1.9 billion tokens across languages including isiZulu, Yoruba, Swahili, and isiXhosa, InkubaLM-0.4B (with 400 million parameters) builds on Meta’s LLaMA 2 architecture, providing a smaller model than the original LLaMA 2 pretrained model with 7 billion parameters.
- IBM Research Brazil and the University of São Paulo have collaborated on projects aimed at preserving Brazilian Indigenous languages such as Guarani Mbya and Nheengatu. These initiatives emphasize co-creation with Indigenous communities and address concerns about cultural exposure and language ownership. Initial efforts included electronic dictionaries, word prediction, and basic translation tools. Notably, when a prototype writing assistant for Guarani Mbya raised concerns about exposing their language and culture online, project leaders paused further development pending community consensus.
- Researchers have fine-tuned pre-trained models for Nheengatu using linguistic educational sources and translations of the Bible, with plans to incorporate community-guided spellcheck tools. Since the translations relying on data from the Bible, primarily translated by colonial priests, often sounded archaic and could reflect cultural abuse and violence, they were classified as potentially “toxic” data that would not be used in any deployed system without explicit Indigenous community agreement…(More)”.
Beyond Answers Presented by AI: Unlocking Innovation and Problem Solving Through A New Science of Questions
Paper by Stefaan Verhulst and Hannah Chafetz: “Today’s global crises–from climate change to inequality–have demonstrated the need for a broader conceptual transformation in how to approach societal issues. Focusing on the questions can transform our understanding of today’s problems and unlock new discoveries and innovations that make a meaningful difference. Yet, how decision-makers go about asking questions remains an underexplored topic.
Much of our recent work has focused on advancing a new science of questions that uses participatory approaches to define and prioritize the questions that matter most. As part of this work, we convened an Interdisciplinary Committee on Establishing and Democratizing the Science of Questions to discuss why questions matter for society and the actions needed to build a movement around this new science.
In this article, we provide the main findings from these gatherings. First we outline several roles that questions can play in shaping policy, research innovation. Supported by real-world examples, we discuss how questions are a critical device for setting agendas, increasing public participation, improving coordination, and more. We then provide five key challenges in developing a systematic approach to questions raised by the Committee and potential solutions to address those challenges. Existing challenges include weak recognition of questions, lack of skills and lack of consensus on what makes a good question.
In the latter part of this piece, we propose the concept of The QLab–a global center dedicated to the research and practice of asking questions. Co-developed with the Committee, the QLab would include five core functions: Thought Leadership, Architecting the Discovery of Questions, Field Building, Institutionalization and Practice, and Research on Questioning. By focusing on these core functions, The QLab can make significant progress towards establishing a field dedicated to the art and science of asking questions…(More)”.