Why you should develop a Rules as Code-enabled future

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Tim de Sousa: “In 2021, Rules as Code (RaC) is truly hitting its stride. More governments are exploring the concept of machine-consumable legislation, regulation and policy, research institutes have been established, papers and reports are being published, tools and platforms are being built, and multi-disciplinary teams are learning new ways to draft and implement rules by getting their hands dirty.

RaC is still an emerging practice. Much of the current discussion about RaC is centred on introductory questions such as why and how we should code rules (and we’ve tried to answer those questions here), but to understand the true potential of RaC, we have to take a longer view.

In this two-part series, I set out some possible optimistic futures that could be enabled by RaC. We have to ask ourselves what kind of world we want to build with coded rules. so we can better plan how to get there.

Trustworthy automated decisions

The first reaction that RaC practitioners are often faced with is the fear of the killer robot. What happens if the automated system makes a wrong decision? What if that decision hurts someone? This is not an unfounded fear – we have seen poorly implemented and poorly used automated systems raise debts that are not owed, and lead to the arrest of innocent people. All human-built systems have flaws, and RaC-enabled systems are not immune.

As a former administrative lawyer and someone who grapples with the ethical uses of technology on a daily basis, the use of RaC to help people understand what decisions are being made and how they’re being made – that is, to enable trustworthy automated decisions – is particularly compelling.

Administrative law is the body of law that regulates how governments make decisions. In common law countries, this generally includes requirements that only relevant matters should be taken into account, irrelevant matters should not be, reasons should be given for decisions, and there should be workable avenues for merits reviews of decisions…(More)”

GovTech Maturity Index : The State of Public Sector Digital Transformation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the World Bank: “Governments have been using technology to modernize the public sector for decades. The World Bank Group (WBG) has been a partner in this process, providing both financing and technical assistance to facilitate countries’ digital transformation journeys since the 1980s. The WBG launched the GovTech Initiative in 2019 to support the latest generation of these reforms. Over the past five years, developing countries have increasingly requested WBG support to design even more advanced digital transformation programs. These programs will help to increase government efficiency and improve the access to and the quality of service delivery, provide more government-to-citizen and government-to-business communications, enhance transparency and reduce corruption, improve governance and oversight, and modernize core government operations. The GovTech Initiative appropriately responds to this growing demand.

The GovTech Maturity Index (GTMI) measures the key aspects of four GovTech focus areas—supporting core government systems, enhancing service delivery, mainstreaming citizen engagement, and fostering GovTech enablers—and assists advisers and practitioners in the design of new digital transformation projects. Constructed for 198 economies using consistent data sources, the GTMI is the most comprehensive measure of digital transformation in the public sector. Several similar indices and indicators are available in the public domain to measure aspects of digital government—including the United Nations e-Government Development Index, the WBG’s Digital Adoption Index, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Digital Government Index.

These indices, however, do not fully capture the aspects of emphasis in the GovTech approach—the whole-of-government approach and citizen centricity—as key when assessing the use of digital solutions for public sector modernization. The GTMI is not intended to be an assessment of readiness or performance; rather, it is intended to complement the existing tools and diagnostics by providing a baseline and a benchmark for GovTech maturity and by offering insights to those areas that have room for improvement. The GTMI is designed to be used by practitioners, policy makers, and task teams involved in the design of digital transformation strategies and individual projects, as well as by those who seek to understand their own practices and learn from those of others….(More)”.

Old Dog, New Tricks: Retraining and the Road to Government Reform

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Beth Noveck: “…To be sure, one strategy for modernizing government is hiring new people with fresh skills in the fields of technology, data science, design, and marketing. Today, only 6 percent of the federal workforce is under 30 and, if age is any proxy for mastery of these in-demand new skills, then efforts by non-profits such as the Partnership for Public Service and the Tech Talent Project to attract a younger generation to work in the public sector are crucial. But we will not reinvent government fast enough through hiring alone.

The crucial and overlooked mechanism for improving government effectiveness is, therefore, to change how people work by training public servants across departments to use data and collective intelligence at each stage of the problem-solving process to foster more informed decision-making, more innovative solutions to problems, and more agile implementation of what works. All around the world we have witnessed how, when public servants work differently, government solves problems better.

Jonathan Wachtel, the lone city planner in Lakewood, Colorado, a suburb of Denver, has been able to undertake 500 sustainability projects because he knows how to collaborate and codesign with a network of 20,000 residents. When former Mayor of New Orleans Mitch Landrieu launched an initiative to start using data and resident engagement to address the city’s abysmal murder rate, that effort led to a 25 percent reduction in homicides in two years and a further decline to its lowest levels in 50 years by 2019. Because Samir Brahmachari, former Secretary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, of the government of India, turned to crowdsourcing and engaged the assistance of 7,900 contributors, he was able to identify six already-approved drugs that showed promised in the fight against tuberculosis….(More)”.

Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Steven Pinker: “Can reading a book make you more rational? Can it help you understand why there is so much irrationality in the world? These are the goals of Rationality, Steven Pinker’s follow-up to Enlightenment Now. In the 21st century, humanity is reaching new heights of scientific understanding—and at the same time appears to be losing its mind. How can a species that developed vaccines for Covid-19 in less than a year produce so much fake news, medical quackery, and conspiracy theorizing? Pinker rejects the cynical cliché that humans are an irrational species — cavemen out of time saddled with biases, fallacies, and illusions. After all, we discovered the laws of nature, lengthened and enriched our lives, and discovered the benchmarks for rationality itself. Instead, he explains that we think in ways that are sensible in the low-tech contexts in which we spend most of our lives, but fail to take advantage of the powerful tools of reasoning our best thinkers have discovered over the millennia: logic, critical thinking, probability, correlation and causation, and optimal ways to update beliefs and commit to choices individually and with others. These tools are not a standard part of our educational curricula, and have never been presented clearly and entertainingly in a single book—until now. Rationality also explores its opposite: how the rational pursuit of self-interest, sectarian solidarity, and uplifting mythology by individuals can add up to crippling irrationality in a society. Collective rationality depends on norms that are explicitly designed to promote objectivity and truth. Rationality matters. It leads to better choices in our lives and in the public sphere, and is the ultimate driver of social justice and moral progress. Brimming with insight and humour, Rationality will enlighten, inspire, and empower….(More)”.

World Wide Weird: Rise of the Cognitive Ecosystem

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Braden R. Allenby at Issues: “Social media, artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and the data economy are coming together in a way that transcends how humans understand and control our world.

In the beginning of the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, an ape, after hugging a strange monolith, picks up a bone and randomly begins playing with it … and then, as Richard Strauss’s Also sprach Zarathustra rings in the background, the ape realizes that the bone it is holding is, in fact, a weapon. The ape, the bone, and the landscape remain exactly the same, yet something fundamental has changed: an ape casually holding a bone is a very different system than an ape consciously wielding a weapon. The warrior ape is an emergent cognitive phenomenon, neither required nor deterministically produced by the constituent parts: a bone, and an ape, in a savannah environment.

Cognition as an emergent property of techno-human systems is not a new phenomenon. Indeed, it might be said that the ability of humans and their institutions to couple to their technologies to create such techno-human systems is the source of civilization itself. Since humans began producing artifacts, and especially since we began creating artifacts designed to capture, preserve, and transmit information—from illuminated manuscripts and Chinese oracle bones to books and computers—humans have integrated with their technologies to produce emergent cognitive results.

And these combinations have transformed the world. Think of the German peasants, newly literate, who were handed populist tracts produced on then-newfangled printing presses in 1530: the Reformation happened. Thanks to the printers, information and strategies flowed between the thinkers and the readers faster, uniting people across time and space. Eventually, the result was another fundamental shift in the cognitive structure: the Enlightenment happened.

Since humans began producing artifacts, and especially artifacts designed to capture, preserve, and transmit information, humans have integrated with their technologies to produce emergent cognitive results.

In the 1980s Edwin Hutchins found another cognitive structure when he observed a pre-GPS crew navigating on a naval vessel: technology in the form of devices, charts, and books were combined with several individuals with specialized skills and training to produce knowledge of the ship’s position (the “fix”). No single entity, human or technological, contained the entire process; rather, as Hutchins observed: “An interlocking set of partial procedures can produce the overall observed pattern without there being a representation of that overall pattern anywhere in the system.” The fix arises as an emergent cognitive product that is nowhere found in the constituent pieces, be they technology or human; indeed, Hutchins speaks of “the computational ecology of navigation tools.”

Fast forward to today. It should be no surprise that at some point techno-human cognitive systems such as social media, artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT), 5G, cameras, computers, and sensors should begin to form their own ecology—significantly different in character from human cognition….(More)”

The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dirk W. Bester: “Most cost-benefit analyses assume that the estimates of costs and benefits are more or less accurate and unbiased. But what if, in reality, estimates are highly inaccurate and biased? Then the assumption that cost-benefit analysis is a rational way to improve resource allocation would be a fallacy. Based on the largest dataset of its kind, we test the assumption that cost and benefit estimates of public investments are accurate and unbiased. We find this is not the case with overwhelming statistical significance. We document the extent of cost overruns, benefit shortfalls, and forecasting bias in public investments. We further assess whether such inaccuracies seriously distort effective resource allocation, which is found to be the case. We explain our findings in behavioral terms and explore their policy implications. Finally, we conclude that cost-benefit analysis of public investments stands in need of reform and we outline four steps to such reform…(More)”.

From Ethics Washing to Ethics Bashing: A View on Tech Ethics from Within Moral Philosophy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Elettra Bietti: “The word ‘ethics’ is overused in technology policy circles. Weaponized in support of deregulation, self-regulation or hands-off governance, “ethics” is increasingly identified with technology companies’ self-regulatory efforts and with shallow appearances of ethical behavior. So-called “ethics washing” by tech companies is on the rise, prompting criticism and scrutiny from scholars and the tech community at large. In parallel to the growth of ethics washing, its condemnation has led to a tendency to engage in “ethics bashing.” This consists in the trivialization of ethics and moral philosophy now understood as discrete tools or pre-formed social structures such as ethics boards, self-governance schemes or stakeholder groups.

The misunderstandings underlying ethics bashing are at least three-fold: (a) philosophy is understood in opposition and as alternative to law, political representation and social organizing; (b) philosophy and “ethics” are seen as a formalistic methodology, vulnerable to instrumentalization and abuse, and thus ontologically flawed; and (c) engagement in moral philosophy is downplayed and portrayed as mere “ivory tower” intellectualization of complex problems that need to be dealt with through alternative and more practical methodologies.

This essay argues that the rhetoric of ethics and morality should not be reductively instrumentalized, either by the industry in the form of “ethics washing,” or by scholars and policy-makers in the form of “ethics bashing.” Grappling with the role of philosophy and ethics requires moving beyond simplification and seeing ethics as a mode of inquiry that facilitates the evaluation of competing tech policy strategies. In other words, we must resist narrow reductivism of moral philosophy as instrumentalized performance and renew our faith in its intrinsic moral value as a mode of knowledge-seeking and inquiry. Far from mandating a self-regulatory scheme or a given governance structure, moral philosophy in fact facilitates the questioning and reconsideration of any given practice, situating it within a complex web of legal, political and economic institutions. Moral philosophy indeed can shed new light on human practices by adding needed perspective, explaining the relationship between technology and other worthy goals, situating technology within the human, the social, the political. It has become urgent to start considering technology ethics also from within and not only from outside of ethics….(More)”.

Psychology and Behavioral Economics: Applications for Public Policy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book edited by Kai Ruggeri: “…offers an expert introduction to how psychology can be applied to a range of public policy areas. It examines the impact of psychological research for public policymaking in economic, financial, and consumer sectors; in education, healthcare, and the workplace; for energy and the environment; and in communications.

Your energy bills show you how much you use compared to the average household in your area. Your doctor sends you a text message reminder when your appointment is coming up. Your bank gives you three choices for how much to pay off on your credit card each month. Wherever you look, there has been a rapid increase in the importance we place on understanding real human behaviors in everyday decisions, and these behavioral insights are now regularly used to influence everything from how companies recruit employees through to large-scale public policy and government regulation. But what is the actual evidence behind these tactics, and how did psychology become such a major player in economics? Answering these questions and more, this team of authors, working across both academia and government, present this fully revised and updated reworking of Behavioral Insights for Public Policy.

This updatecovers everything from how policy was historically developed, to major research in human behavior and social psychology, to key moments that brought behavioral sciences to the forefront of public policy. Featuring over 100 empirical examples of how behavioral insights are being used to address some of the most critical challenges faced globally, the book covers key topics such as evidence-based policy, a brief history of behavioral and decision sciences, behavioral economics, and policy evaluation, all illustrated throughout with lively case studies.

Including end-of-chapter questions, a glossary, and key concept boxes to aid retention, as well as a new chapter revealing the work of the Canadian government’s behavioral insights unit, this is the perfect textbook for students of psychology, economics, public health, education, and organizational sciences, as well as public policy professionals looking for fresh insight into the underlying theory and practical applications in a range of public policy areas….(More)”.

The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Jonathan Rauch: “Disinformation. Trolling. Conspiracies. Social media pile-ons. Campus intolerance. On the surface, these recent additions to our daily vocabulary appear to have little in common. But together, they are driving an epistemic crisis: a multi-front challenge to America’s ability to distinguish fact from fiction and elevate truth above falsehood.

In 2016 Russian trolls and bots nearly drowned the truth in a flood of fake news and conspiracy theories, and Donald Trump and his troll armies continued to do the same. Social media companies struggled to keep up with a flood of falsehoods, and too often didn’t even seem to try. Experts and some public officials began wondering if society was losing its grip on truth itself. Meanwhile, another new phenomenon appeared: “cancel culture.” At the push of a button, those armed with a cellphone could gang up by the thousands on anyone who ran afoul of their sanctimony.

In this pathbreaking book, Jonathan Rauch reaches back to the parallel eighteenth-century developments of liberal democracy and science to explain what he calls the “Constitution of Knowledge”—our social system for turning disagreement into truth.

By explicating the Constitution of Knowledge and probing the war on reality, Rauch arms defenders of truth with a clearer understanding of what they must protect, why they must do so—and how they can do it. His book is a sweeping and readable description of how every American can help defend objective truth and free inquiry from threats as far away as Russia and as close as the cellphone…(More)”.

The Global Drive to Control Big Tech

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the Freedom House: “In the high-stakes battle between states and technology companies, the rights of internet users have become the main casualties. A growing number of governments are asserting their authority over tech firms, often forcing the businesses to comply with online censorship and surveillance. These developments have contributed to an unprecedented assault on free expression online, causing global internet freedom to decline for an 11th consecutive year.

Global norms have shifted dramatically toward greater government intervention in the digital sphere. Of the 70 states covered by this report, a total of 48 pursued legal or administrative action against technology companies. While some moves reflected legitimate attempts to mitigate online harms, rein in misuse of data, or end manipulative market practices, many new laws imposed excessively broad censorship and data-collection requirements on the private sector. Users’ online activities are now more pervasively moderated and monitored by companies through processes that lack the safeguards featured in democratic governance, such as transparency, judicial oversight, and public accountability.

The drive toward national regulation has emerged partly due to a failure to address online harms through self-regulation. The United States played a leading role in shaping early internet norms around free speech and free markets, but its laissez-faire approach to the tech industry created opportunities for authoritarian manipulation, data exploitation, and widespread malfeasance. In the absence of a shared global vision for a free and open internet, governments are adopting their own approaches to policing the digital sphere. Policymakers in many countries have cited a vague need to retake control of the internet from foreign powers, multinational corporations, and in some cases, civil society.

This shift in power from companies to states has come amid a record-breaking crackdown on freedom of expression online. In 56 countries, officials arrested or convicted people for their online speech. Governments suspended internet access in at least 20 countries, and 21 states blocked access to social media platforms, most often during times of political turmoil such as protests and elections. As digital repression intensifies and expands to more countries, users understandably lack confidence that government initiatives to regulate the internet will lead to greater protection of their rights…(More)”.