Report by Citizen Lab: “…we examine the rising trend of gender-based digital transnational repression (DTR), which specifically targets women human rights defenders in exile or in the diaspora, using gender-specific digital tactics aimed at silencing and disabling their voices. Our research draws on the lived experiences of 85 women human rights defenders, originating from 24 home countries and residing in 23 host countries, to help us understand how gender and sexuality play a central role in digital transnational repression…(More)”.
Generative Agent Simulations of 1,000 People
Paper by Joon Sung Park: “The promise of human behavioral simulation–general-purpose computational agents that replicate human behavior across domains–could enable broad applications in policymaking and social science. We present a novel agent architecture that simulates the attitudes and behaviors of 1,052 real individuals–applying large language models to qualitative interviews about their lives, then measuring how well these agents replicate the attitudes and behaviors of the individuals that they represent. The generative agents replicate participants’ responses on the General Social Survey 85% as accurately as participants replicate their own answers two weeks later, and perform comparably in predicting personality traits and outcomes in experimental replications. Our architecture reduces accuracy biases across racial and ideological groups compared to agents given demographic descriptions. This work provides a foundation for new tools that can help investigate individual and collective behavior…(More)”.
Why ‘open’ AI systems are actually closed, and why this matters
Paper by David Gray Widder, Meredith Whittaker & Sarah Myers West: “This paper examines ‘open’ artificial intelligence (AI). Claims about ‘open’ AI often lack precision, frequently eliding scrutiny of substantial industry concentration in large-scale AI development and deployment, and often incorrectly applying understandings of ‘open’ imported from free and open-source software to AI systems. At present, powerful actors are seeking to shape policy using claims that ‘open’ AI is either beneficial to innovation and democracy, on the one hand, or detrimental to safety, on the other. When policy is being shaped, definitions matter. To add clarity to this debate, we examine the basis for claims of openness in AI, and offer a material analysis of what AI is and what ‘openness’ in AI can and cannot provide: examining models, data, labour, frameworks, and computational power. We highlight three main affordances of ‘open’ AI, namely transparency, reusability, and extensibility, and we observe that maximally ‘open’ AI allows some forms of oversight and experimentation on top of existing models. However, we find that openness alone does not perturb the concentration of power in AI. Just as many traditional open-source software projects were co-opted in various ways by large technology companies, we show how rhetoric around ‘open’ AI is frequently wielded in ways that exacerbate rather than reduce concentration of power in the AI sector…(More)”.
NegotiateAI
About: “The NegotiateAI app is designed to streamline access to critical information on the UN Plastic Treaty Negotiations to develop a legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including the marine environment. It offers a comprehensive, centralized database of documents submitted by member countries available here, along with an extensive collection of supporting resources, including reports, research papers, and policy briefs. You can find more information about the NegotiateAI project on our website…The Interactive Treaty Assistant simplifies the search and analysis of documents by INC members, enabling negotiators and other interested parties to quickly pinpoint crucial information. With an intuitive interface, The Interactive Treaty Assistant supports treaty-specific queries and provides direct links to relevant documents for deeper research…(More)”.
Building a Responsible Humanitarian Approach: The ICRC’s policy on Artificial Intelligence
Policy by the ICRC: “…is anchored in a purely humanitarian approach driven by our mandate and Fundamental Principles. It is meant to help ICRC staff learn about AI and safely explore its humanitarian potential.
This policy is the result of a collaborative and multidisciplinary approach that leveraged the ICRC’s humanitarian and operational expertise, existing international AI standards, and the guidance and feedback of external experts.
Given the constantly evolving nature of AI, this document cannot possibly address all the questions and challenges that will arise in the future, but we hope that it provides a solid basis and framework to ensure we take a responsible and human-centred approach when using AI in support of our mission, in line with our 2024–2027 Institutional Strategy…(More)”.
Flood data platform governance: Identifying the technological and socio-technical approach(es) differences
Paper by Mahardika Fadmastuti, David Nowak, and Joep Crompvoets: “Data platform governance concept focuses on what decision must be made in order to reach the data platform mission and who makes that decision. The current study of the data platform governance framework is applied for the general platform ecosystem that values managing data as an organizational asset. However, flood data platforms are essential tools for enhancing the governance of flood risks and data platform governance in flood platforms is understudied. By adopting a data governance domains framework, this paper identifies the technological and socio-technical approach(es) differences in public value(s) of flood data platforms. Empirically, we analyze 2 cases of flood data platforms to contrast the differences. Utilizing a qualitative approach, we combined web-observations and interviews to collect the data. Regardless of its approach, integrating flood data platform technologies into government authorities’ routines requires organizational commitment that drives value creation. The key differences between these approaches lies in the way the government sectors see this flood data platform technology. Empirically, our case study shows that the technological approach values improving capabilities and performances of the public authority while the socio-technical approach focuses more importantly providing engagement value with the public users. We further explore the differences of these approaches by analyzing each component of decision domains in the data governance framework…(More)”
Building a Policy Compass: Navigating Future Migration with Anticipatory Methods
Report by Sara Marcucci and Stefaan Verhulst: “Migration is a complex, dynamic issue, shaped by interconnected drivers like climate change, political shifts, and economic instability. Traditional migration policies often fall short, reacting to events after they unfold. In a rapidly changing world, anticipating migration trends is essential for developing responsive, proactive, and informed policies that address emerging challenges before they escalate. “Building a Policy Compass: Navigating Future Migration with Anticipatory Methods” introduces a suite of methods that aim to shift migration policy toward evidence-based, forward-looking decisions. This report, published for the Big Data for Migration Alliance, provides an overview of the challenges and criteria to consider when selecting and using anticipatory methods for migration policy.
To guide policymakers, the report organizes these methods into a taxonomy based on three categories:
- Experience-Based Methods: These capture lived experiences through approaches like narrative interviews and participatory action research. They ground migration policy in the perspectives of those directly affected by it.
- Expertise-Based Methods: Using specialized knowledge from migration experts, methods such as expert panels or Delphi processes can inform nuanced policy decisions.
- Exploration-Based Methods: These methods, including scenario planning and wildcards analysis, encourage creative, out-of-the-box thinking for addressing unexpected migration challenges.
The report emphasizes that not every method is suited to all migration contexts and offers eight criteria to guide method selection…(More)”.
Boosting: Empowering Citizens with Behavioral Science
Paper by Stefan M. Herzog and Ralph Hertwig: “Behavioral public policy came to the fore with the introduction of nudging, which aims to steer behavior while maintaining freedom of choice. Responding to critiques of nudging (e.g., that it does not promote agency and relies on benevolent choice architects), other behavioral policy approaches focus on empowering citizens. Here we review boosting, a behavioral policy approach that aims to foster people’s agency, self-control, and ability to make informed decisions. It is grounded in evidence from behavioral science showing that human decision making is not as notoriously flawed as the nudging approach assumes. We argue that addressing the challenges of our time—such as climate change, pandemics, and the threats to liberal democracies and human autonomy posed by digital technologies and choice architectures—calls for fostering capable and engaged citizens as a first line of response to complement slower, systemic approaches…(More)”.
National biodiversity data infrastructures: ten essential functions for science, policy, and practice
Paper by Anton Güntsch et al: “Today, at the international level, powerful data portals are available to biodiversity researchers and policymakers, offering increasingly robust computing and network capacities and capable data services for internationally agreed-on standards. These accelerate individual and complex workflows to map data-driven research processes or even to make them possible for the first time. At the national level, however, and alongside these international developments, national infrastructures are needed to take on tasks that cannot be easily funded or addressed internationally. To avoid gaps, as well as redundancies in the research landscape, national tasks and responsibilities must be clearly defined to align efforts with core priorities. In the present article, we outline 10 essential functions of national biodiversity data infrastructures. They serve as key providers, facilitators, mediators, and platforms for effective biodiversity data management, integration, and analysis that require national efforts to foster biodiversity science, policy, and practice…(More)”.
Privacy guarantees for personal mobility data in humanitarian response
Paper by Nitin Kohli, Emily Aiken & Joshua E. Blumenstock: “Personal mobility data from mobile phones and other sensors are increasingly used to inform policymaking during pandemics, natural disasters, and other humanitarian crises. However, even aggregated mobility traces can reveal private information about individual movements to potentially malicious actors. This paper develops and tests an approach for releasing private mobility data, which provides formal guarantees over the privacy of the underlying subjects. Specifically, we (1) introduce an algorithm for constructing differentially private mobility matrices and derive privacy and accuracy bounds on this algorithm; (2) use real-world data from mobile phone operators in Afghanistan and Rwanda to show how this algorithm can enable the use of private mobility data in two high-stakes policy decisions: pandemic response and the distribution of humanitarian aid; and (3) discuss practical decisions that need to be made when implementing this approach, such as how to optimally balance privacy and accuracy. Taken together, these results can help enable the responsible use of private mobility data in humanitarian response…(More)”.