A Guide for Decision Makers using Data to Understand the Extent and Spread of COVID-19 by the National Academies: “This rapid expert consultation provides insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the data on the COVID-19 pandemic by applying five criteria to seven types of data available to support decision making. It was produced through the Societal Experts Action Network (SEAN), an activity of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. SEAN links researchers in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences with decision makers to respond to policy questions arising from the COVID-19 pandemic….(More)”
Disinformation Tracker
Press Release: “Today, Global Partners Digital (GPD), ARTICLE 19, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), PROTEGE QV and the Centre for Human Rights of the University of Pretoria jointly launched an interactive map to track and analyse disinformation laws, policies and patterns of enforcement across Sub-Saharan Africa.
The map offers a birds-eye view of trends in state responses to disinformation across the region, as well as in-depth analysis of the state of play in individual countries, using a bespoke framework to assess whether laws, policies and other state responses are human rights-respecting.
Developed against a backdrop of rapidly accelerating state action on COVID-19 related disinformation, the map is an open, iterative product. At the time of launch, it covers 31 countries (see below for the full list), with an aim to expand this in the coming months. All data, analysis and insight on the map has been generated by groups and actors based in Africa….(More)”.
Democracy Index 2019
The Economist: “The twelfth edition of the Democracy Index finds that the average global score has fallen from 5.48 in 2018, to 5.44. This is the worst average global score since The Economist Intelligence Unit first produced the Democracy Index in 2006. Driven by sharp regressions in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, four out of the five categories that make up the global average score have deteriorated. Although there were some dramatic downturns in the scores of certain countries, others have bucked the overall trend and registered impressive improvements. Download the free report to find out where your country ranks…
The EIU Democracy Index provides a snapshot of the state of world democracy for 165 independent states and two territories. The Democracy Index is based on five categories: electoral process and pluralism; civil liberties; the functioning of government; political participation; and political culture. Based on their scores on 60 indicators within these categories, each country is then itself classified as one of four types of regime: full democracy; flawed democracy; hybrid regime; and authoritarian regime….(More)”.
How Data Can Map and Make Racial Inequality More Visible (If Done Responsibly)
Reflection Document by The GovLab: “Racism is a systemic issue that pervades every aspect of life in the United States and around the world. In recent months, its corrosive influence has been made starkly visible, especially on Black people. Many people are hurting. Their rage and suffering stem from centuries of exclusion and from being subject to repeated bias and violence. Across the country, there have been protests decrying racial injustice. Activists have called upon the government to condemn bigotry and racism, to act against injustice, to address systemic and growing inequality.
Institutions need to take meaningful action to address such demands. Though racism is not experienced in the same way by all communities of color, policymakers must respond to the anxieties and apprehensions of Black people as well as those of communities of color more generally. This work will require institutions and individuals to reflect on how they may be complicit in perpetuating structural and systematic inequalities and harm and to ask better questions about the inequities that exist in society (laid bare in both recent acts of violence and in racial disadvantages in health outcomes during the ongoing COVID-19 crisis). This work is necessary but unlikely to be easy. As Rashida Richardson, Director of Policy Research at the AI Now Institute at NYU notes:
“Social and political stratifications also persist and worsen because they are embedded into our social and legal systems and structures. Thus, it is difficult for most people to see and understand how bias and inequalities have been automated or operationalized over time.”
We believe progress can be made, at least in part, through responsible data access and analysis, including increased availability of (disaggregated) data through data collaboration. Of course, data is only one part of the overall picture, and we make no claims that data alone can solve such deeply entrenched problems. Nonetheless, data can have an impact by making inequalities resulting from racism more quantifiable and inaction less excusable.
…Prioritizing any of these topics will also require increased community engagement and participatory agenda setting. Likewise, we are deeply conscious that data can have a negative as well as positive impact and that technology can perpetuate racism when designed and implemented without the input and participation of minority communities and organizations. While our report here focuses on the promise of data, we need to remain aware of the potential to weaponize data against vulnerable and already disenfranchised communities. In addition, (hidden) biases in data collected and used in AI algorithms, as well as in a host of other areas across the data life cycle, will only exacerbate racial inequalities if not addressed….(More)”
ALSO: The piece is supplemented by a crowdsourced listing of Data-Driven Efforts to Address Racial Inequality.
Toward Inclusive Urban Technology
Report by Denise Linn Riedl: “Our cities are changing at an incredible pace. The technology being deployed on our sidewalks and streetlights has the potential to improve mobility, sustainability, connectivity, and city services.
Public value and public inclusion in this change, however, are not inevitable. Depending on how these technologies are deployed, they have the potential to increase inequities and distrust as much as they can create responsive government services.
Recognizing this tension, an initial coalition of local practitioners began collaborating in 2019 with the support of the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. We combined knowledge of and personal experience with local governments to tackle a common question: What does procedural justice look like when cities deploy new technology?
This guide is meant for any local worker—inside or outside of government—who is helping to plan or implement technological change in their community. It’s a collection of experiences, cases, and best practices that we hope will be valuable and will make projects stronger, more sustainable, and more inclusive….(More)”.
Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions
Report by the OECD: “Public authorities from all levels of government increasingly turn to Citizens’ Assemblies, Juries, Panels and other representative deliberative processes to tackle complex policy problems ranging from climate change to infrastructure investment decisions. They convene groups of people representing a wide cross-section of society for at least one full day – and often much longer – to learn, deliberate, and develop collective recommendations that consider the complexities and compromises required for solving multifaceted public issues.
This “deliberative wave” has been building since the 1980s, gaining momentum since around 2010. This report has gathered close to 300 representative deliberative practices to explore trends in such processes, identify different models, and analyse the trade-offs among different design choices as well as the benefits and limits of public deliberation.
It includes Good Practice Principles for Deliberative Processes for Public Decision Making, based on comparative empirical evidence gathered by the OECD and in collaboration with leading practitioners from government, civil society, and academics. Finally, the report explores the reasons and routes for embedding deliberative activities into public institutions to give citizens a more permanent and meaningful role in shaping the policies affecting their lives….(More)”.
AI Procurement in a Box
Toolbox by the World Economic Forum: “AI Procurement in a Box is a practical guide that helps governments rethink the procurement of artificial intelligence (AI) with a focus on innovation, efficiency and ethics. Developing a new approach to the acquisition of emerging technologies such as AI will not only accelerate the adoption of AI in the administration, but also drive the development of ethical standards in AI development and deployment. Innovative procurement approaches have the potential to foster innovation, create competitive markets for AI systems and uphold public trust in the public-sector adoption of AI.
AI has the potential to vastly improve government operations and meet the needs of citizens in new ways, ranging from intelligently automating administrative processes to generating insights for public policy developments and improving public service delivery, for example, through personalized healthcare. Many public institutions are lagging behind in harnessing this powerful technology because of challenges related to data, skills and ethical deployment.
Public procurement can be an important driver of government adoption of AI. This means not only ensuring that AI-driven technologies offering the best value for money are purchased, but also driving the ethical development and deployment of innovative AI systems….(More)”.
EU Company Data: State of the Union 2020
Report by OpenCorporates: “… on access to company data in the EU. It’s completely revised, with more detail on the impact that the lack of access to this critical dataset has – on business, on innovation, on democracy, and society.
The results are still not great however:
- Average score is low
The average score across the EU in terms of access to company data is just 40 out of 100. This is better than the average score 8 years ago, which was just 23 out of 100, but still very low nevertheless. - Some major economies score badly
Some of the EU’s major economies continue to score very badly indeed, with Germany, for example, scoring just 15/100, Italy 10/100, and Spain 0/100. - EU policies undermined
The report identifies 15 areas where the lack of open company data frustrates, impedes or otherwise has a negative impact on EU policy. - Inequalities widened
The report also identifies how inequalities are further widened by poor access to this critical dataset, and how the recovery from COVID-19 will be hampered by it too.
On the plus side, the report also identifies the EU Open Data & PSI Directive passed last year as potentially game changing – but only if it is implemented fully, and there are significant doubts whether this will happen….(More)”
Libraries Supporting Open Government: Areas for Engagement and Lessons Learned
Report by IFLA: “This report explores the roles libraries play in different countries’ Open Government Partnership Action Plans. Within the OGP framework, states and civil society actors work together to set out commitments for reforms, implement and review the impacts in recurring two-year cycles.
In different countries’ OGP commitments over the years, libraries and library associations assisted other agencies with the implementation of their commitments, or lead their own initiatives. Offering venues for civic engagement, helping develop tools and platforms for easier access to government records, providing valuable cultural Open Data and more – libraries can play a versatile role in supporting and enabling Open Government.
The report outlines the Open Government policy areas that libraries have been engaged in, the roles they took up to help deliver on OGP commitments, and some of the key ways to maximise the impact of library interventions, drawing on the lessons from earlier OGP cycles….(More)”.
Global collaboration on human migration launches digital hub
Press Release: “The International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission joined forces with The Governance Lab (The GovLab) at the NYU Tandon School of Engineering to launch an online home for the Big Data for Migration (BD4M) Alliance, the first-ever global network dedicated to facilitating responsible data innovation and collaboration for informed decision making on migration and human mobility.
We live in a fast-moving world where a huge amount of data is being generated by the private sector but public-private data partnerships still remain limited. The BD4M, convened in 2018 by the European Commission’s Knowledge Centre on Migration and Demography (KCMD) and the IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre (GMDAC), seeks to foster more cooperation in this area by connecting stakeholders and leveraging non-traditional data sources to improve understanding.
The new BD4M web page, www.data4migration.org, hosted by the GovLab, serves as a hub for the Alliance’s activities. It aims to inform stakeholders about the BD4M members, its objectives, ongoing projects, upcoming events and opportunities for collaboration.
To facilitate access to knowledge about how data innovation has contributed to informing migration policy and programs, for example, the BD4M recently launched the Data Innovation Directory, which features examples of applications of new data sources and methodologies in the field of migration and human mobility.
The BD4M is open to members of international organizations, NGOs, the private sector, researchers and individual experts. In its partnership with The GovLab, the BD4M has helped identify a set of priority questions on migration that new data sources could contribute to answering. These questions were formulated by experts and validated through a public voting campaign as part of The 100 Questions Initiative….(More)”.