Unlocking the Potential of Data: Innovative Policies for Responsible Data Reuse and Addressing Data Asymmetries

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Testimony by Stefaan Verhulst to the German Bundestag: “Let me begin by highlighting the potential of data when used and reused responsibly. Although we hear much about the risks of using data–and many of the fears are indeed justified–it’s also important to keep in mind the very real possibilities that data offers for advancing the public good.

We live in a datafied world, characterized by an unprecedented supply–even glut–of data. In this world, data has become a critical resource for informing policy and decision-making processes.  When properly analyzed and utilized, data can play a critical role in helping policymakers–and other stakeholders–address a range of critical problems, in sectors as diverse as public health, climate, innovation and economic development, combating urban decay–and much more.

Sometimes this data is readily available. Most of the time it is not. One of the areas with the biggest potential–yet also significant challenges–is data reuse – data already collected for one purpose using it for another.  Data reuse can provide invaluable insights into current phenomena, help us understand the causes of emerging trends, and guide us in developing effective solutions to pressing challenges. Moreover, analysis from data re-use can serve as a powerful tool for anticipating future developments and prescribing targeted interventions…

Despite the very potential of data and data reuse, it’s undeniable we face significant challenges in realizing data’s full societal value.

One of the primary obstacles is a lack of access to high-quality, timely data by the public sector,  civil society, and other groups that are working toward the public good. 

We live in a paradoxical situation today, marked both by the availability of an unprecedented amount of data, but also by unprecedented asymmetries in access to that data for reuse in the public interest. 

I believe that the growing asymmetries between those who have data (often from the private sector) and those who are best positioned to use it for the public good, represents one of the major challenges of our era. 

Data policy to date has primarily focused on preventing the misuse of data, often for valid reasons as mentioned earlier. However, this approach has inadvertently overlooked the missed uses of data – the opportunities we fail to capitalize on due to overly restrictive policies or lack of innovative frameworks for data sharing and utilization…

Given these challenges, what can policymakers do? What steps can policymakers such as yourselves – and other stakeholders, from the private sector, academia and civil society – take to help maximize the potential of our datafied society and economy, and to ensure that the benefits of our data age are maximized in as equitable and inclusive a manner as possible?..(More)” (German) (See also: Experten: Innovative Ansätze in der Datenpolitik nötig).

Using AI to Inform Policymaking

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper for the AI4Democracy series at The Center for the Governance of Change at IE University: “Good policymaking requires a multifaceted approach, incorporating diverse tools and processes to address the varied needs and expectations of constituents. The paper by Turan and McKenzie focuses on an LLM-based tool, “Talk to the City” (TttC), developed to facilitate collective decision-making by soliciting, analyzing, and organizing public opinion. This tool has been tested in three distinct applications:

1. Finding Shared Principles within Constituencies: Through large-scale citizen consultations, TttC helps identify common values and priorities.

2. Compiling Shared Experiences in Community Organizing: The tool aggregates and synthesizes the experiences of community members, providing a cohesive overview.

3. Action-Oriented Decision Making in Decentralized Governance: TttC supports decision-making processes in decentralized governance structures by providing actionable insights from diverse inputs.

CAPABILITIES AND BENEFITS OF LLM TOOLS

LLMs, when applied to democratic decision-making, offer significant advantages:

  • Processing Large Volumes of Qualitative Inputs: LLMs can handle extensive qualitative data, summarizing discussions and identifying overarching themes with high accuracy.
  • Producing Aggregate Descriptions in Natural Language: The ability to generate clear, comprehensible summaries from complex data makes these tools invaluable for communicating nuanced topics.
  • Facilitating Understanding of Constituents’ Needs: By organizing public input, LLM tools help leaders gain a better understanding of their constituents’ needs and priorities.

CASE STUDIES AND TOOL EFFICACY

The paper presents case studies using TttC, demonstrating its effectiveness in improving collective deliberation and decision-making. Key functionalities include:

  • Aggregating Responses and Clustering Ideas: TttC identifies common themes and divergences within a population’s opinions.
  • Interactive Interface for Exploration: The tool provides an interactive platform for exploring the diversity of opinions at both individual and group scales, revealing complexity, common ground, and polarization…(More)”

Societal interaction plans—A tool for enhancing societal engagement of strategic research in Finland

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Kirsi Pulkkinen, Timo Aarrevaara, Mikko Rask, and Markku Mattila: “…we investigate the practices and capacities that define successful societal interaction of research groups with stakeholders in mutually beneficial processes. We studied the Finnish Strategic Research Council’s (SRC) first funded projects through a dynamic governance lens. The aim of the paper is to explore how the societal interaction was designed and commenced at the onset of the projects in order to understand the logic through which the consortia expected broad impacts to occur. The Finnish SRC introduced a societal interaction plan (SIP) approach, which requires research consortia to consider societal interaction alongside research activities in a way that exceeds conventional research plans. Hence, the first SRC projects’ SIPs and the implemented activities and working logics discussed in the interviews provide a window into exploring how active societal interaction reflects the call for dynamic, sustainable practices and new capabilities to better link research to societal development. We found that the capacities of dynamic governance were implemented by integrating societal interaction into research, in particular through a ‘drizzling’ approach. In these emerging practices SIP designs function as platforms for the formation of communities of experts, rather than traditional project management models or mere communication tools. The research groups utilized the benefits of pooling academic knowledge and skills with other types of expertise for mutual gain. They embraced the limits of expertise and reached out to societal partners to truly broker knowledge, and exchange and develop capacities and perspectives to solve grand societal challenges…(More)”.

Liberated Public Services: A new vision for citizens, professionals and policy makers

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Demos: “The crisis in public services is visible to everyone in Britain today. Waiting lists, crumbling buildings, exhausted professionals. This is affecting our wellbeing, our health and our economy. It’s increasingly clear that Britain cannot get back on the right track without a public services renewal. The aim of Demos’ Future Public Services Taskforce is to help deliver that renewal.

In this paper, the second paper of the Taskforce, we introduce a new vision for public services, which we call liberated public services. This includes public services being liberated from New Public Management across four domains:

  • Citizens are liberated to bring their whole selves to services and seen as a resource to be worked with,
    not a problem to be fixed.
  • Professionals are liberated from tight specifications defined from the centre.
  • Communities are liberated to partner with public services, whether formally or informally.
  • Policy makers in central government – ministers, advisors and civil servants – are liberated from day-today micromanagement of services and providers to a broader, strategic role supporting learning and best
    practice.

Liberating public services will require the central state to think less about imposing a view from Whitehall and instead ask itself: how can it provide the conditions for public service renewal across the country?..(More)”.

Missions with Impact: A practical guide to formulating effective missions

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Guide by the Bertelsmann Stiftung: “The complex challenges associated with sustainability transitions pose major problems for modern political systems and raise the question of whether new ways of negotiation, decision-making and implementation are needed to address these challenges. For example, given the broad-reaching effects of an issue like climate change on diverse aspects of daily life, policy fields and action areas, conventional solutions are unlikely to prove effective.

Mission orientation proves to be a promising approach for addressing cross-cutting thematic challenges. It involves formulating well-defined “missions” intended to direct innovation, economic activities and societal initiatives toward desired outcomes. These missions aim for transformational change, targeting fundamental shifts that extend beyond the usual political timelines to ensure enduring impact. Across several OECD countries and at the EU level, initiatives embracing a mission-oriented approach are gaining momentum. For instance, the EU’s mission of “100 climate-neutral cities” exemplifies this approach by exploring new pathways to achieve climate neutrality by 2030. Here, stakeholders from diverse sectors can get involved to help generate effective solutions targeting the objective of climate neutrality…(More)”.

Little Communes Everywhere

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Review by Jay Caspian Kang: “…I was thinking about all this while I read “The Commune Form: The Transformation of Everyday Life,” a forthcoming book by the comparative-literature professor Kristin Ross. Ross—who has previously written about the Paris Commune of 1871 and France’s student uprising of May, 1968—focusses particularly on the ZAD de Notre-Dame-des-Landes, a thousand-acre commune created by French farmers and their allies in the late two-thousands, in an effort to block the construction of a new airport, which would have kicked many people off their own land. (The French government had designated the land a zone d’aménagement différé, or a “deferred development area”; the farmers kept the acronym but used it to mean zone à défendre, or “zone to defend.”) For a commune to work, Ross argues, one must have both a physical space to defend against an antagonist and an articulated vision for an alternative organization of human relationships and economy. The “commune form,” as she defines it, is a “political movement that is also the collective elaboration of a desired way of life—the means becoming the end.” Theory, in other words, needs to be put into practice, in an intimate and earnest setting, so that people can test out their ideas about living within the context of an actual place among actual people.

Ross identifies one of the motivating forces behind the creation of the ZAD as alienation, which was “less the loss of some human essence than it was the loss of possibilities: the sense of blockages and impasses brought on by the destruction and fragmentation of the social tissue by capitalism.” Drawing upon the work of the French philosopher Henri Lefebvre, Ross refers to “the colonization of everyday life,” each part of our day becoming dominated by economic reasoning. This, she writes, dispossesses us of “our dignity, our social life, our time, the sense of mastery over our lives, the beauty and health of our lived environment, and of the very possibility of working together to invent our future collectively.” Under such conditions, the commune becomes the only alternative…

Physical spaces, whether pools or parks, can be reclaimed through collective action, in much the way that admissions policies at exclusive magnet schools can be protected by a small group of dedicated parents. Small, everyday victories are the only real cure for alienation. What else would work?…(More)”

Collective Intelligence in Open Policymaking

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Rafał Olszowski: “This book examines the nexus of collective intelligence (CI), a feature of online projects in which various types of communities solve problems intelligently, and open policymaking, as a trend of large groups of people shaping public policies.

While doing so, it presents the current state of theoretical knowledge for these concepts, many practical examples of successful and unsuccessful projects, as well as additional research and laboratory experiments. The book develops an analytical framework based on qualitative research, which is applied to the analysis of different projects in selected case studies, such as Decide Madrid; Better Reykjavik; Loomio; Deliberatorium; Civic Budget of the City of Kraków.

The book is structured into four chapters, addressing essential questions in the field: (1) Opening Policymaking; (2) Beyond the Individual: Understanding the Evolution of Collective Intelligence; (3) A Review of the Projects Using Collective Intelligence in Policymaking; (4) Online Public Debate. How Can We Make it More Intelligent?…(More)”.

Generative AI and Democracy: Impacts and Interventions

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Demos (UK): “This week’s election announcement has set all political parties firmly into campaign mode and over the next 40 days the public will be weighing up who will get their vote on 4th July.

This democratic moment, however, will take place against the backdrop of a new and largely untested threat; generative-AI. In the lead up to the election, the strength of our electoral integrity is likely to be tested by the spread of AI-generated content and deepfakes – an issue that over 60% of the public are concerned about, according to recent Demos and Full Fact polling.

Our new paper takes a look at the near and long-term solutions at our disposal for bolstering the resilience of our democratic institutions amidst the modern technological age. We explore the top four pressing mechanisms by which generative-AI challenges the stability of democracy, and how to mitigate them…(More)”.

Science in the age of AI

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the Royal Society: “The unprecedented speed and scale of progress with artificial intelligence (AI) in recent years suggests society may be living through an inflection point. With the growing availability of large datasets, new algorithmic techniques and increased computing power, AI is becoming an established tool used by researchers across scientific fields who seek novel solutions to age-old problems. Now more than ever, we need to understand the extent of the transformative impact of AI on science and what scientific communities need to do to fully harness its benefits. 

This report, Science in the age of AI (PDF), explores how AI technologies, such as deep learning or large language models, are transforming the nature and methods of scientific inquiry. It also explores how notions of research integrity; research skills or research ethics are inevitably changing, and what the implications are for the future of science and scientists. 

The report addresses the following questions: 

  • How are AI-driven technologies transforming the methods and nature of scientific research? 
  • What are the opportunities, limitations, and risks of these technologies for scientific research? 
  • How can relevant stakeholders (governments, universities, industry, research funders, etc) best support the development, adoption, and uses of AI-driven technologies in scientific research? 

In answering these questions, the report integrates evidence from a range of sources, including research activities with more than 100 scientists and the advisement of an expert Working group, as well as a taxonomy of AI in science (PDF), a historical review (PDF) on the role of disruptive technologies in transforming science and society, and a patent landscape review (PDF) of artificial intelligence related inventions, which are available to download…(More)”

Towards a pan-EU Freedom of Information Act? Harmonizing Access to Information in the EU through the internal market competence

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Alberto Alemanno and Sébastien Fassiaux: “This paper examines whether – and on what basis – the EU may harmonise the right of access to information across the Union. It does by examining the available legal basis established by relevant international obligations, such as those stemming from the Council of Europe, and EU primary law. Its demonstrates that neither the Council of Europe – through the European Convention of Human Rights and the more recent Trømso Convention – nor the EU – through Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights – do require the EU to enact minimum standards of access to information. That Charter’s provision combined with Articles 10 and 11 TEU do require instead only the EU institutions – not the EU Member States – to ensure public access to documents, including legislative texts and meeting minutes. Regulation 1049/2001 was adopted (originally Art. 255 TEC) on such a legal basis and should be revised accordingly. The paper demonstrates that the most promising legal basis enabling the EU to proceed towards the harmonisation of access to information within the EU is offered by Article 114 TFEU. It argues hat the harmonisation of the conditions governing access to information across Member States would facilitate cross-border activities and trade, thus enhancing the internal market. Moreover, this would ensure equal access to information for all EU citizens and residents, irrespective of their location within the EU. Therefore, the question is not whether but how the EU may – under Article 114 TFEU – act to harmonise access to information. If the EU enjoys wide legislative discretion under Article 114(1) TFEU, this is not absolute but is subject to limits derived from fundamental rights and principles such as proportionality, equality, and subsidiarity. Hence, the need to design the type of harmonisation capable of preserving existing national FOIAs while enhancing the weakest ones. The only type of harmonisation fit for purpose would therefore be minimal, as opposed to maximal, by merely defining the minimum conditions required on each Member State’s national legislation governing the access to information…(More)”.