Category: Collection

Privacy Laws Around the World

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Bloomberg Law: “Development of international privacy laws and regulations with critical impact on the global economy been extremely active over the last several years.

Download Privacy Laws Around the World to access common and disparate elements of the privacy laws from 61 countries. Crafted by Cynthia Rich of Morrison & Foerster LLP, the report includes expert analysis on privacy laws in Europe and Eurasia (non-EEA); East, Central and South Asia and the Pacific; the Western Hemisphere (Latin America, Caribbean and Canada); as well as Africa and the Near East.

Privacy Laws Around the World…access:

Side-by-side charts comparing four key compliance areas including registration requirements, cross-border data transfer limitations, data breach notification requirements and data protection officer requirements

A country-by-country review of the special characteristics of framework privacy laws

An overview of privacy legislation in development around the world…(More) (Requires Registration)”

Deepening Public Participation: Summary and Resources

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Matt Leighninger at Public Agenda: “Whether dealing with an immediate challenge or building long-term infrastructure, participation skills are a valuable asset for anyone’s proverbial toolkit. In case you missed a post, we identified ten key talents (each with a set of specific skills) for public participation:

We also discussed the importance of logistical and project management skills, and identified several free, online, commonly-used platforms and tools that can help with such tasks.

Although not everyone involved with a participation project needs all of these skills, participation leaders should be aware of these skills exist and know who in the community possesses them. Ultimately, training people in these skills is not only helpful for organizing a project or sustaining a process, but also for longer-term efforts to build a sustainable participation infrastructure.

Resources for Participation Leaders

Because public participation is such a diffuse field, many people who are trying to engage citizens more productively do not know that many tools, resources and case studies exist. They may not know that there are participation consultants or experienced practitioners nearby.

As a result, people continually ‘reinvent the wheel’ in public participation, and often make mistakes that others have already made. The first step in planning for participation, therefore, is to take a good look around at the resources and experiences available.

Many organizations, several of which are listed below, provide trainings, how-to materials, or other resources for building participation skills. These resources range from open source tools and information to full consulting and project management services….(More)”

Gov2Vec: Learning Distributed Representations of Institutions and Their Legal Text

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

John J. Nay at arXiv.org:”We compare policy differences across institutions by embedding representations of the entire legal corpus of each institution and the vocabulary shared across all corpora into a continuous vector space. We apply our method, Gov2Vec, to Supreme Court opinions, Presidential actions, and official summaries of Congressional bills. The model discerns meaningful differences between government branches. We also learn representations for more fine-grained word sources: individual Presidents and (2-year) Congresses. The similarities between learned representations of Congresses over time and sitting Presidents are negatively correlated with the bill veto rate, and the temporal ordering of Presidents and Congresses was implicitly learned from only text. With the resulting vectors we answer questions such as: how does Obama and the 113th House differ in addressing climate change and how does this vary from environmental or economic perspectives? Our work illustrates vector-arithmetic-based investigations of complex relationships between word sources based on their texts. We are extending this to create a more comprehensive legal semantic map….(More)”

We’re failing to solve the world’s ‘wicked problems.’ Here’s a better approach

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

 and  at the Conversation: “We live in a world burdened by large-scale problems that refuse to go away: the refugee crisis; terrorism; rising sea levels; frequent floods, droughts and wildfires; not to mention persistent inequality and violation of basic human rights across the world.

What do these problems have in common? They resist any simple solution. In policy research they are called “wicked.” This is because cause-effect relations are complex and solutions unclear; many of these problems are urgent, yet there is no central authority to solve them; their magnitude is often hard to estimate; and those trying to solve them may even contribute to causing them.

The EU refugee crisis, the topic of a recent U.N. summit, is a good example: Driven by regional conflicts and poverty, and assisted by trafficking networks, people from Africa and the Middle East continue to take enormous risks to enter EU territory by land or sea. For several years now, thousands of refugees have died on this journey each year andno solution is in sight. EU member countries continue to blame their neighbors for either taking in too many refugees or for refusing to help, while there is little shared interest and limited capacity for actually addressing the sources of the problem.

What’s the best way to effectively address these types of wicked problems?…

Facing the current refugee situation, U.N. member states got together two weeks ago to sign a declaration for a more coordinated response to the refugee crisis. Yet, critics have pointed out that the goals are too vague and the document is not legally binding. Such meetings have happened several times in the course of the EU refugee crisis – with very little outcome. In reality, “grand solutions” for large-scale problems either do not exist, or they are too vague or controversial to be of much value.

 

…A number of development experts have argued that “small wins” might be a promising alternative to tackle large-scale problems. Small wins focus on smaller-scale independent projects with attainable and measurable objectives. For example, many firms independently develop solutions to increase energy efficiency or to avoid waste. Likewise, several EU countries have looked into better ways of processing asylum applications and easing the integration of refugees.

Such small wins may not solve the entire problem – in these cases, climate change or refugee crisis – but they have tangible positive outcomes in line with longer-term goals. Also, the more countries and parties deal with the same problem, the greater the number of innovative experiments.

The only problem is: How can such small wins add up to a larger-scale sustainable solution?….

Similarly, EU countries are increasingly moving from idiosyncratic to modular solutions of refugee management and integration. For example, the German trade union organization IG Metall is currently developing connected modules of language and professional training for refugeesthat allow for faster integration into higher-skilled labor markets. These modules are designed to be transferable across industry sectors, and they serve as important foundations for more job-specific training.

Overall, modular solutions can reduce the complexity of climate adaptation and refugee integration. In developing and disseminating such solutions, intermediary organizations are very important – development agencies, standard-setters, consulting groups, NGOs, industrial relations partners….(More)”

The challenges and limits of big data algorithms in technocratic governance

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Marijn Janssen and George Kuk in Government Information Quarterly: “Big data is driving the use of algorithm in governing mundane but mission-critical tasks. Algorithms seldom operate on their own and their (dis)utilities are dependent on the everyday aspects of data capture, processing and utilization. However, as algorithms become increasingly autonomous and invisible, they become harder for the public to detect and scrutinize their impartiality status. Algorithms can systematically introduce inadvertent bias, reinforce historical discrimination, favor a political orientation or reinforce undesired practices. Yet it is difficult to hold algorithms accountable as they continuously evolve with technologies, systems, data and people, the ebb and flow of policy priorities, and the clashes between new and old institutional logics. Greater openness and transparency do not necessarily improve understanding. In this editorial we argue that through unraveling the imperceptibility, materiality and governmentality of how algorithms work, we can better tackle the inherent challenges in the curatorial practice of data and algorithm. Fruitful avenues for further research on using algorithm to harness the merits and utilities of a computational form of technocratic governance are presented….(More)”

 

The Architecture of Innovation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Hollie Russon Gilman, and Jessica Gover at the Beeck Center: “Technology is transforming how we live our lives—from new solutions in health, education, defense, and beyond. The private sector provides user-centric, digital, customer-oriented solutions—in real time. We should expect the same from government. The government needs to evolve to keep up with these rapid changes in technology and data use. We need a government that is nimble and adaptive to change. More importantly, we need to create a culture within government that allows for a culture of innovation that leads to outcomes. At the same time, innovation—new technologies, data, and partnerships—have also triggered a need for rapid change in governance and public policy. With the election only a month away, the next president has the opportunity to pivot—to adopt a governance structure that proactively drives change and delivers results.

Today, we are thrilled to announce the release of our latest publication, “The Architecture of Innovation: Institutionalizing Innovation in Federal Policymaking,” produced in partnership with The Massive Data Institute at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy. The report provides recommendations for how the next administration can pilot, iterate, and scale innovative approaches to more effectively serve the needs of the American people. “The Architecture of Innovation” offers recommendations for how government can structurally organize for change at the highest levels to not only adapt and meet the challenges of today, but also anticipate and meet the needs of tomorrow.

We are launching the report today at our Fall convening, Data for Social Good: Innovation in the Next Administration. The report launch will be bookended by a fireside chat retrospective on innovation in the Obama Administration and a panel discussing innovation in past, present, and future administrations.

As presidential transition teams on both sides are building out their plans for the next administration, they have an unprecedented opportunity to maximize and grow the strides made by the Obama administration to create impactful change. For federal policymaking to create lasting outcomes, we believe that creating a holistic culture of innovation in government is the key to solving some of our biggest civic challenges. We hope that our report and today’s convening will provide a helpful roadmap as to best organization for innovation in government for 2016 and beyond…(More)”

Data Ethics: Investing Wisely in Data at Scale

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by David Robinson & Miranda Bogen prepared for the MacArthur and Ford Foundations: ““Data at scale” — digital information collected, stored and used in ways that are newly feasible — opens new avenues for philanthropic investment. At the same time, projects that leverage data at scale create new risks that are not addressed by existing regulatory, legal and best practice frameworks. Data-oriented projects funded by major foundations are a natural proving ground for the ethical principles and controls that should guide the ethical treatment of data in the social sector and beyond.

This project is an initial effort to map the ways that data at scale may pose risks to philanthropic priorities and beneficiaries, for grantmakers at major foundations, and draws from desk research and unstructured interviews with key individuals involved in the grantmaking enterprise at major U.S. foundations. The resulting report was prepared at the joint request of the MacArthur and Ford Foundations.

Grantmakers are exploring data at scale, but currently have poor visibility into its benefits and risks. Rapid technological change, the scarcity of data science expertise, limited training and resources, and a lack of clear guideposts around emergent risks all contribute to this problem.

Funders have important opportunities to invest in, learn from, and innovate around data-intensive projects, in concert with their grantees. Grantmakers should not treat the new ethical risks of data at scale as a barrier to investment, but these risks also must not become a blind spot that threatens the success and effectiveness of philanthropic projects. Those working with data at scale in the philanthropic context have much to learn: throughout our conversations with stakeholders, we heard consistently that grantmakers and grantees lack baseline knowledge on using data at scale, and many said that they are unsure how to make better informed decisions, both about data’s benefits and about its risks. Existing frameworks address many risks introduced by data-intensive grantmaking, but leave some major gaps. In particular, we found that:

  • Some new data-intensive research projects involve meaningful risk to vulnerable populations, but are not covered by existing human subjects regimes, and lack a structured way to consider these risks. In the philanthropic and public sector, human subject review is not always required and program officers, researchers, and implementers do not yet have a shared standard by which to evaluate ethical implications of using public or existing data, which is often exempt from human subjects review.
  • Social sector projects often depend on data that reflects patterns of bias or discrimination against vulnerable groups, and face a challenge of how to avoid reinforcing existing disparities. Automated decisions can absorb and sanitize bias from input data, and responsibly funding or evaluating statistical models in data-intensive projects increasingly demands advanced mathematical literacy which foundations lack.
  • Both data and the capacity to analyze it are being concentrated in the private sector, which could marginalize academic and civil society actors.Some individuals and organizations have begun to call attention to these issues and create their own trainings, guidelines, and policies — but ad hoc solutions can only accomplish so much.

To address these and other challenges, we’ve identified eight key questions that program staff and grantees need to consider in data-intensive work:

  1. For a given project, what data should be collected, and who should have access to it?
  2. How can projects decide when more data will help — and when it won’t?
  3. How can grantmakers best manage the reputational risk of data-oriented projects that may be at a frontier of social acceptability?
  4. When concerns are recognized with respect to a data-intensive grant, how will those concerns get aired and addressed?
  5. How can funders and grantees gain the insight they need in order to critique other institutions’ use of data at scale?
  6. How can the social sector respond to the unique leverage and power that large technology companies are developing through their accumulation of data and data-related expertise?
  7. How should foundations and nonprofits handle their own data?
  8. How can foundations begin to make the needed long term investments in training and capacity?

Newly emergent ethical issues inherent in using data at scale point to the need for both a broader understanding of the possibilities and challenges of using data in the philanthropic context as well as conscientious treatment of data ethics issues. Major foundations can play a meaningful role in building a broader understanding of these possibilities and challenges, and they can set a positive example in creating space for open and candid reflection on these issues. To those ends, we recommend that funders:…(More)”

You Can Help Map the Accessibility of the World

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Josh Cohen in Next City: “…using a web app called Project Sidewalk….The app, from a team at the University of Maryland’s Human-Computer Interaction Lab, crowdsources audit data in order to map urban accessibility. After taking a brief tutorial on what to look for and a how-to, participants “walk” the D.C. streets using Google Street View. The app provides a set of tools to mark curb ramps (or a lack of them), broken sidewalks, and obstacles in the sidewalk, and rank them on a scale of 1 to 5 for level of accessibility.

Project Sidewalk’s public beta launched on August 30. As of this writing, 212 people have participated and audited 377.5 miles of sidewalk in D.C.

“We’re starting in D.C. as a launch point because we know D.C., we live here, we can do physical audits to validate the data we’re getting,” says Jon Froehlich, a University of Maryland professor who is leading the project. “But we want to expand to 10 more cities in the next year or two.”

Project Sidewalk tutorial

Project Sidewalk wants to produce a few end products with their data too. The first is an accessibility-mapping tool that offers end-to-end route directions that takes into account a person’s particular mobility challenges. Froehlich points out that barriers for someone in an electric wheelchair might be different than someone in a manual wheelchair or someone with vision impairment. The other product is an “access score” map that ranks a neighborhood’s accessibility and highlights problem areas.

Froehlich hopes departments of transportation might adopt the tool as well. “People tasked with improving infrastructure can start to use it to triage their work or verify their own data. A lot of cities don’t have money or time to go out and map the accessibility of their streets,” he says.

Crowdsourcing and using Street View to reduce the amount of labor required to conduct audits is an important first step for Project Sidewalk, but in order to expand to cities throughout the country, they need to automate the review process as much as possible. To do that, the team is experimenting with computer learning….(More)”.

Resource Library for Cross-Sector Collaboration

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

The Intersector Project: “Whether you’re working on a local collective impact initiative or a national public-private partnership; whether you’re a practitioner or a researcher; whether you’re looking for basics or a detailed look at a particular topic, our Resource Library can help you find the information and tools you need for your cross-sector thinking and practice. The Library — which includes resources from research organizations, advisory groups, training organizations, academic centers and journals, and more — spans issue areas, sectors, and partnership types….(More)”

Proudly powered by WordPress