Future of Professionals

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Thomson Reuters: “First, the productivity benefits we have been promised are now becoming more apparent. As AI adoption has become widespread, professionals can more tangibly tell us about how they will use this transformative technology and the greater efficiency and value it will provide. The most common use cases for AI-powered technology thus far include drafting documents, summarizing information, and performing basic research. Second, there’s a tremendous sense of excitement about the value that new AI-powered technology can bring to the day-to-day lives of the professionals we surveyed. While more than half of professionals said they’re most excited about the benefits that new AI-powered technologies can bring in terms of time-savings, nearly 40% said the new value that will be brought is what excites them the most.

This report highlights how AI could free up that precious commodity of time. As with the adoption of all new technology, change appears moderate and the impact incremental. And yet, within the year, our respondents predicted that for professionals, AI could free up as much as four hours a week. What will they do with 200 extra hours of time a year? They might reinvest that time in strategic work, innovation, and professional development, which could help companies retain or advance their competitive advantage. Imagine the broader impact on the economy and GDP from this increased efficiency. For US lawyers alone, that is a combined 266 million hours of increased productivity. That could translate into $100,000 in new, billable time per lawyer each year, based on current average rates – with similar productivity gains projected across various professions. The time saved can also be reinvested in professional development, nurturing work-life balance, and focusing on wellness and mental health. Moreover, the economic and organizational benefits of these time-savings are substantial. They could lead to reduced operational costs and higher efficiency, while enabling organizations to redirect resources toward strategic initiatives, fostering growth and competitiveness.

Finally, it’s important to acknowledge there’s still a healthy amount of reticence among professionals to fully adopt AI. Respondents are concerned primarily with the accuracy of outputs, and almost two-thirds of respondents agreed that data security is a vital component of responsible use. These concerns aren’t trivial, and they warrant attention as we navigate this new era of technology. While AI can provide tremendous productivity benefits to professionals and generate greater value for businesses, that’s only possible if we build and use this technology responsibly.”…(More)”.

Democracy online: technologies for democratic deliberation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Adam Meylan-Stevenson, Ben Hawes, and Matt Ryan: “This paper explores the use of online tools to improve democratic participation and deliberation. These tools offer new opportunities for inclusive communication and networking, specifically targeting the participation of diverse groups in decision-making processes. It summarises recent research and published reports by users of these tools and categorises the tools according to functions and objectives. It also draws on testimony and experiences recorded in interviews with some users of these tools in public sector and civil society organisations internationally.


The objective is to introduce online deliberation tools to a wider audience, including benefits, limitations and potential disadvantages, in the immediate context of research on democratic deliberation. We identify limitations of tools and of the context and markets in which online deliberation tools are currently being developed. The paper suggests that fostering a collaborative approach among technology developers and democratic practitioners, might improve opportunities for funding and continual optimisation that have been used successfully in other online application sectors…(More)”.

Dada-Disinfo

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Mark Kaigwa et al: “The “Dada Disinfo: Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV) Report,” prepared by Nendo and Pollicy, outlines the pervasive issue of TFGBV in Kenya’s vibrant but volatile social media ecosystem. The report draws on extensive research, including social media analytics, surveys, and in-depth interviews with content creators, to shed light on the manifestations, perpetrators, and impacts of TFGBV. The project, supported by USAID and conducted in collaboration with Pollicy, integrates advanced analytics to offer insights and potential solutions to mitigate online gender-based violence in Kenya…(More)”.

United Nations Global Principles for Information Integrity

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

United Nations: “Technological advances have revolutionized communications, connecting people on a previously unthinkable scale. They have supported communities in times of crisis, elevated marginalized voices and helped mobilize global movements for racial justice and gender equality.

Yet these same advances have enabled the spread of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech at an unprecedented volume, velocity and virality, risking the integrity of the information ecosystem.

New and escalating risks stemming from leaps in AI technologies have made strengthening information integrity one of the urgent tasks of our time.

This clear and present global threat demands coordinated international action.

The United Nations Global Principles for Information Integrity show us another future is possible…(More)”

Searching for Safer, Healthier Digital Spaces

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Search for Common Ground (Search): “… has specialized in approaches that leverage media such as radio and television to reach target audiences. In recent years, the organization has been more intentional about digital and online spaces, delving deeper into the realm of digital peacebuilding. Search has since implemented a number of digital peacebuilding projects.

Search wanted to understand if and how its initiatives were able to catalyze constructive agency among social media users, away from a space of apathy, self-doubt, or fear to incite inclusion, belonging, empathy, mutual understanding, and trust. This report examines these hypotheses using primary data from former and current participants in Search’s digital peacebuilding initiatives…(More)”

Positive Pathways report

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Michael Lawrence and Megan Shipman: “Polycrisis analysis reveals the complex and systemic nature of the world’s problems, but it can also help us pursue “positive pathways” to better futures. This report outlines the sorts of systems changes required to avoid, mitigate, and navigate through polycrisis given the dual nature of crises as harmful disasters and opportunities for transformation. It then examines the progression between three prominent approaches to systems change—leverage points, tipping points, and multi-systemic stability landscapes—by highlighting their advances and limitations. The report concludes that new tools like Cross-Impact Balance analysis can build on these approaches to help navigate through polycrisis by identifying stable and desirable multi-systemic equilibria…(More)”

Satisfaction with democracy has declined in recent years in high-income nations

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Pew Research Center: “..Since 2017, we’ve regularly asked people in 12 economically advanced democracies how satisfied they are with the state of their democracy. Overall, satisfaction declined in these countries between 2017 and 2019 before bouncing back in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trend chart over time showing that satisfaction with democracy across 12 high-income, democratic countries is down in recent years

Since 2021, however, people in these nations have become more frustrated with their democracies. A median of 49% across these 12 nations were satisfied with the way their democracy was working in 2021; today, just 36% hold this view. (The 2024 survey was conducted before the European Parliament elections in June.)

Trend chart over time showing declines in satisfaction with democracy since 2021 across 9 countries

Satisfaction is lower today than it was in 2021 in nine of the 12 nations where we have asked the question consistently. This includes six countries where satisfaction has dropped by double digits: Canada, Germany, Greece, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Satisfaction has not increased in any of the 12 countries surveyed…(More)”

AI, data governance and privacy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

OECD Report: “Recent AI technological advances, particularly the rise of generative AI, have raised many data governance and privacy questions. However, AI and privacy policy communities often address these issues independently, with approaches that vary between jurisdictions and legal systems. These silos can generate misunderstandings, add complexities in regulatory compliance and enforcement, and prevent capitalising on commonalities between national frameworks. This report focuses on the privacy risks and opportunities stemming from recent AI developments. It maps the principles set in the OECD Privacy Guidelines to the OECD AI Principles, takes stock of national and regional initiatives, and suggests potential areas for collaboration. The report supports the implementation of the OECD Privacy Guidelines alongside the OECD AI Principles. By advocating for international co-operation, the report aims to guide the development of AI systems that respect and support privacy…(More)”.

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).

Illuminating Lived Experience

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Lab Note from the Sydney Policy Lab: “The lived experiences of people involved in care – from informal and formal care workers to the people they support – is foundational to the Australia Cares project. To learn from the ways people with lived experience are included in co-design and research methods, the Sydney Policy Lab initiated reflective research that has resulted in a Lab Note on Illuminating Lived Experience (pdf, 1MB).

Through a series of interviews, dialogues and collaborative writing processes, co-authors explored tensions between different approaches and core concepts underpinning lived experience methods and shared examples of those methods in practice.

Illuminating Lived Experience poses questions that may help guide researchers and policymakers seeking to engage people with lived experience and three core principles we believe are required for such engagements.

The Lab Note aims to encourage researchers to be creative in the ways co-design and lived experience are approached while being true to the critical roots of participatory methodologies. Rather than prescribing methods, the principles and practices developed are offered as a guide – a starting point for play…(More)”