COVID isn’t going anywhere, neither should our efforts to increase responsible access to data

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Andrew J. Zahuranec, Hannah Chafetz and Stefaan Verhulst: “..Moving forward, institutions will need to consider how to embed non-traditional data capacity into their decision-making to better understand the world around them and respond to it.

For example, wastewater surveillance programmes that emerged during the pandemic continue to provide valuable insights about outbreaks before they are reported by clinical testing and have the potential to be used for other emerging diseases.

We need these and other programmes now more than ever. Governments and their partners need to maintain and, in many cases, strengthen the collaborations they established through the pandemic.

To address future crises, we need to institutionalize new data capacities – particularly those involving non-traditional datasets that may capture digital information that traditional health surveys and statistical methods often miss.

The figure above summarizes the types and sources of non-traditional data sources that stood out most during the COVID-19 response.

The types and sources of non-traditional data sources that stood out most during the COVID-19 response. Image: The GovLab

In our report, we suggest four pathways to advance the responsible access to non-traditional data during future health crises…(More)”.

Data solidarity: why sharing is not always caring 

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Barbara Prainsack: “To solve these problems, we need to think about data governance in new ways. It is no longer enough to assume that asking people to consent to how their data is used is sufficient to prevent harm. In our example of telehealth, and in virtually all data-related scandals of the last decade, from Cambridge Analytica to Robodebt, informed consent did not, or could not, have avoided the problem. We all regularly agree to data uses that we know are problematic – not because we do not care about privacy. We agree because this is the only way to get access to benefits, a mortgage, or teachers and health professionals. In a world where face-to-face assessments are unavailable or excessively expensive, opting out of digital practices would no longer be an option (Prainsack, 2017, pp. 126-131; see also Oudshoorn, 2011).

Solidarity-based data governance (in short: data solidarity) can help us to distribute the risks and the benefits of digital practices more equitably. The details of the framework are spelled out in full elsewhere (Prainsack et al., 2022a, b). In short, data solidarity seeks to facilitate data uses that create significant public value, and at the same time prevent and mitigate harm (McMahon et al., 2020). One important step towards both goals is to stop ascribing risks to data types, and to distinguish between different types of data use instead. In some situations, harm can be prevented by making sure that data is not used for harmful purposes, such as online tracking. In other contexts, however, harm prevention can require that we do not collect the data in the first place. Not recording something, making it invisible and uncountable to others, can be the most responsible way to act in some contexts.

This means that recording and sharing data should not become a default. More data is not always better. Instead, policymakers need to consider carefully – in a dialogue with the people and communities that have a stake in it – what should be recorded, where it will be stored and who governs the data once it has been collected – if at all (see also Kukutai and Taylor, 2016)…(More)”.

Researchers scramble as Twitter plans to end free data access

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Heidi Ledford: “Akin Ünver has been using Twitter data for years. He investigates some of the biggest issues in social science, including political polarization, fake news and online extremism. But earlier this month, he had to set aside time to focus on a pressing emergency: helping relief efforts in Turkey and Syria after the devastating earthquake on 6 February.

Aid workers in the region have been racing to rescue people trapped by debris and to provide health care and supplies to those displaced by the tragedy. Twitter has been invaluable for collecting real-time data and generating crucial maps to direct the response, says Ünver, a computational social scientist at Özyeğin University in Istanbul.

So when he heard that Twitter was about to end its policy of providing free access to its application programming interface (API) — a pivotal set of rules that allows people to extract and process large amounts of data from the platform — he was dismayed. “Couldn’t come at a worse time,” he tweeted. “Most analysts and programmers that are building apps and functions for Turkey earthquake aid and relief, and are literally saving lives, are reliant on Twitter API.”..

Twitter has long offered academics free access to its API, an unusual approach that has been instrumental in the rise of computational approaches to studying social media. So when the company announced on 2 February that it would end that free access in a matter of days, it sent the field into a tailspin. “Thousands of research projects running over more than a decade would not be possible if the API wasn’t free,” says Patty Kostkova, who specializes in digital health studies at University College London…(More)”.

The Economics of Digital Privacy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Avi Goldfarb & Verina F. Que: “There has been increasing attention to privacy in the media and in regulatory discussions. This is a consequence of the increased usefulness of digital data. The literature has emphasized the benefits and costs of digital data flows to consumers and firms. The benefits arise in the form of data-driven innovation, higher quality products and services that match consumer needs, and increased profits. The costs relate to intrinsic and instrumental values of privacy. Under standard economic assumptions, this framing of a cost-benefit tradeoff might suggest little role for regulation beyond ensuring consumers are appropriately informed in a robust competitive environment. The empirical literature thus far has focused on this direct cost-benefit assessment, examining how privacy regulations have affected various market outcomes. However, an increasing body of theory work emphasizes externalities related to data flows. These externalities, both positive and negative, suggest benefits to the targeted regulation of digital privacy…(More)”.

The Fifth Estate: The Power Shift of the Digital Age

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by William H. Dutton: “In the eighteenth century, the printing press enabled the rise of an independent press–the Fourth Estate–that helped check the power of governments, business, and industry. In similar ways, the internet is forming a more independent collectivity of networked individuals, which William H. Dutton identifies as the Fifth Estate. Their network power is contributing to a more pluralist role of individuals in democratic political processes and society, which is not only shaping political accountability but nearly every sector of society. Yet a chorus of critics have dismissed the internet’s more democratic potentials, demonizing social media and user-generated-content as simply sources of fake news and populism. So, is the internet a tool for democracy or anarchy?

In The Fifth Estate, Dutton uses estate theory to illuminate the most important power shift of the digital age. He argues that this network power shift is not only enabling greater democratic accountability in politics and governance but is also empowering networked individuals in their everyday life and work, from checking facts to making civic-minded social interventions. By marshalling world leading research and case studies in a wide range of contexts, Dutton demonstrates that the internet and related digital media are enabling ordinary individuals to search, create, network, collaborate, and leak information in such independent and strategic ways that they enhance their informational and communicative power vis-à-vis other actors and institutions. Dutton also makes the case that internet policy interventions across the globe have increased censorship of users and introduced levels of surveillance that will challenge the vitality of the internet and the Fifth Estate, along with its more pluralist distribution of power. Ambitious and timely, Dutton provides an understanding of the Fifth Estate and its democratic potential so that networked individuals and institutions around the world can maintain and enhance its role in our digital age…(More)”.

Embracing Innovation in Government: Global trends 2023

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the OECD: “Governments worldwide have faced unprecedented challenges in the last few years, and the global mood remains far from optimistic. The world had little time to recover from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic before the invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation dealt the global economy a series of shocks. The culminative effect of these catastrophes has been the destruction of lives and livelihoods, and growing humanitarian, economic and governance crises. Millions of people have been displaced, energy and food markets have been severely disrupted, inflation continues to surge, and many countries are on the brink of recession. Governments must cope with and respond to these emerging threats while already grappling with issues such as climate change, digital disruption and low levels of trust. The challenges they face in ensuring positive outcomes for their people seem to be increasing dramatically.

Yet, despite compounding challenges, governments have been able to adapt and innovate to transform their societies and economies, and more specifically to the focus of this work, to transform themselves and how they design policies, deliver services and manage the business of government. If anything, recent and ongoing crises have catalysed public sector innovation and reinstated the critical role of the state. While the overall tone may be pessimistic, public sector innovation has provided bright spots and room for hope.

The search for these bright spots and entry points for change is the driving force behind this report, and the research that underpins it. As part of the MENA-OECD Governance Programme, the OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Mohammed Bin Rashid Centre for Government Innovation (MBRCGI) have collaborated since 2016 to explore how governments are working to understand, test and embed new ways of doing things. These efforts have culminated in 12 reports on Global Trends in government innovation, including this one, as well as a deep-dive effort on achieving Cross-Border Government Innovation to tackle global challenges.

To take the pulse of public sector innovation this year, OPSI and the MBRCGI have identified and analysed 1 084 innovative initiatives from 94 countries around the world (download CSV)…(More)”

Managing Intellectual Property Rights in Citizen Science: A Guide for Researchers and Citizen Scientists

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Teresa Scassa & Haewon Chung: “IP issues arise in citizen science in a variety of different ways. Indeed, the more broadly the concept of citizen science is cast, the more diverse the potential IP interests. Some community-based projects, for example, may well involve the sharing of traditional knowledge, whereas open innovation projects are ones that are most likely to raise patent issues and to do so in a context where commercialization is a project goal. Trademark issues may also arise, particularly where a project gains a certain degree of renown. In this study we touch on issues of patenting and commercialization; however, we also recognize that most citizen science projects do not have commercialization as an objective, and have IP issues that flow predominantly from copyright law. This guide navigates these issues topically and points the reader towards further research and law in this area should they wish to gain an even more comprehensive understanding of the nuances. It accompanies a prior study conducted by the same authors that created a Typology of Citizen Science Projects from an Intellecutal Property Perspective…(More)”.

UN Guide on Privacy-Enhancing Technologies for Official Statistics

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

UN Guide: “This document presents methodologies and approaches to mitigating privacy risks when using sensitive or confidential data, which are collectively referred to as privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs). National Statistics Offices (NSOs) are entrusted with data that has the potential to drive innovation and improve national services, research, and social benefit. Yet, there has been a rise in sustained cyber threats, complex networks of intermediaries motivated to procure sensitive data, and advances in methods to re-identify and link data to individuals and across multiple data sources. Data breaches erode public trust and can have serious negative consequences for individuals, groups, and communities. This document focuses on PETs that protect data during analysis and dissemination of sensitive information so that the benefits of using data for official statistics can be realized while minimizing privacy risks to those entrusting sensitive data to NSOs…(More)”.

A taxonomy of technology design features that promote potentially addictive online behaviours

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Maèva Flayelle et al: “Gaming disorder was officially recognized as a disorder of addictive behaviour in the International Classification of Diseases 11th revision in 2019. Since then, other types of potentially problematic online behaviour have been discussed as possible candidates for inclusion in the psychiatric nosography of addictive disorders. Understanding these problematic online behaviours requires further study of the specific psychological mechanisms involved in their formation and maintenance. An important but underdeveloped line of research has examined the ways in which technology design features might influence users’ capacity to exert control over how they engage with and use websites and applications, thereby amplifying uncontrolled, and perhaps addictive, use. In this Review, we critically examine the available research on the relationships between technology design features and the loss of control and harms experienced by those who engage in online video gaming, online gambling, cybersexual activities, online shopping, social networking and on-demand TV streaming. We then propose a theory-driven general taxonomy of the design features of online applications that might promote uncontrolled and problematic online behaviours…(More)”.

Building trust in digital trade will require a rethink of trade policy-making

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Susan Ariel Aaronson: “In 2019, Shinzo Abe, then Prime Minister of Japan, stated that if the world wanted to achieve the benefits of the data-driven economy, members of the World Trade Organization should find a common approach to combining ‘data free flow with trust’. However, he never explained what these rules should look like and how nations might find an internationally accepted approach to such rules. In this paper, I argue that trade policy-makers must pay closer attention to users’ concerns if they truly want to achieve ‘data free flow with trust’. I begin with an examination of what the most recent digital trade/ecommerce agreements say about trust and discuss whether they actually meet user concerns. Next, I turn to three different examples of online problems that users have expressed concerns about, namely internet shutdowns/censorship, disinformation, and ransomware, describing how these may yield both trade distortions and less trust online. I argue that policy-makers should address these issues if they believe trade agreements should build trust in cross-border data flows. Moreover, I argue how policy-makers respond to user concerns is as important as what they include in trade agreements. Finally, I note that trade negotiators will need to rethink how they involve the broad public in digital trade policy-making, while recognizing that trade policy agreements may not be the best place to address these problems…(More)”.