Artificial Intelligence: A Threat to Climate Change, Energy Usage and Disinformation

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Press Release: “Today, partners in the Climate Action Against Disinformation coalition released a report that maps the risks that artificial intelligence poses to the climate crisis.

Topline points:

  • AI systems require an enormous amount of energy and water, and consumption is expanding quickly. Estimates suggest a doubling in 5-10 years.
  • Generative AI has the potential to turbocharge climate disinformation, including climate change-related deepfakes, ahead of a historic election year where climate policy will be central to the debate. 
  • The current AI policy landscape reveals a concerning lack of regulation on the federal level, with minor progress made at the state level, relying on voluntary, opaque and unenforceable pledges to pause development, or provide safety with its products…(More)”.

The Judicial Data Collaborative

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

About: “We enable collaborations between researchers, technical experts, practitioners and organisations to create a shared vocabulary, standards and protocols for open judicial data sets, shared infrastructure and resources to host and explain available judicial data.

The objective is to drive and sustain advocacy on the quality and limitations of Indian judicial data and engage the judicial data community to enable cross-learning among various projects…

Accessibility and understanding of judicial data are essential to making courts and tribunals more transparent, accountable and easy to navigate for litigants. In recent years, eCourts services and various Court and tribunals’ websites have made a large volume of data about cases available. This has expanded the window into judicial functioning and enabled more empirical research on the role of courts in the protection of citizen’s rights. Such research can also assist busy courts understand patterns of litigation and practice and can help engage across disciplines with stakeholders to improve functioning of courts.

Some pioneering initiatives in the judicial data landscape include research such as DAKSH’s database; annual India Justice Reports; and studies of court functioning during the pandemic and quality of eCourts data; open datasets including Development Data Lab’s Judicial Data Portal containing District & Taluka court cases (2010-2018) and platforms that collect them such as Justice Hub; and interactive databases such as the Vidhi JALDI Constitution Bench Pendency Project…(More)”.

Understanding and Measuring Hype Around Emergent Technologies

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Swaptik Chowdhury and Timothy Marler: “Inaccurate or excessive hype surrounding emerging technologies can have several negative effects, including poor decisionmaking by both private companies and the U.S. government. The United States needs a comprehensive approach to understanding and assessing public discourse–driven hype surrounding emerging technologies, but current methods for measuring technology hype are insufficient for developing policies to manage it. The authors of this paper describe an approach to analyzing technology hype…(More)”.

Trust in AI companies drops to 35 percent in new study

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Filip Timotija: “Trust in artificial intelligence (AI) companies has dipped to 35 percent over a five-year period in the U.S., according to new data.

The data, released Tuesday by public relations firm Edelman, found that trust in AI companies also dropped globally by eight points, going from 61 percent to 53 percent. 

The dwindling confidence in the rapidly-developing tech industry comes as regulators in the U.S. and across the globe are brainstorming solutions on how to regulate the sector. 

When broken down my political party, researchers found Democrats showed the most trust in AI companies at 38 percent — compared to Republicans’ 24 percent and independents’ 25 percent, per the study.

Multiple factors contributed to the decline in trust toward the companies polled in the data, according to Justin Westcott, Edelman’s chair of global technology.

“Key among these are fears related to privacy invasion, the potential for AI to devalue human contributions, and apprehensions about unregulated technological leaps outpacing ethical considerations,” Westcott said, adding “the data points to a perceived lack of transparency and accountability in how AI companies operate and engage with societal impacts.”

Technology as a whole is losing its lead in trust among sectors, Edelman said, highlighting the key findings from the study.

“Eight years ago, technology was the leading industry in trust in 90 percent of the countries we study,” researchers wrote, referring to the 28 countries. “Now it is most trusted only in half.”

Westcott argued the findings should be a “wake up call” for AI companies to “build back credibility through ethical innovation, genuine community engagement and partnerships that place people and their concerns at the heart of AI developments.”

As for the impacts on the future for the industry as a whole, “societal acceptance of the technology is now at a crossroads,” he said, adding that trust in AI and the companies producing it should be seen “not just as a challenge, but an opportunity.”

Priorities, Westcott continued, should revolve around ethical practices, transparency and a “relentless focus” on the benefits to society AI can provide…(More)”.

Generative AI: Navigating Intellectual Property

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Factsheet by WIPO: “Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly being adopted by many businesses and organizations for the purpose of content generation. Such tools represent both a substantial opportunity to assist business operations and a significant legal risk due to current uncertainties, including intellectual property (IP) questions.

Many organizations are seeking to put guidance in place to help their employees mitigate these risks. While each business situation and legal context will be unique, the following Guiding Principles and Checklist are intended to assist organizations in understanding the IP risks, asking the right questions, and considering potential safeguards…(More)”.

Governing the use of big data and digital twin technology for sustainable tourism

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Eko Rahmadian: “The tourism industry is increasingly utilizing big data to gain valuable insights and enhance decision-making processes. The advantages of big data, such as real-time information, robust data processing capabilities, and improved stakeholder decision-making, make it a promising tool for analyzing various aspects of tourism, including sustainability. Moreover, integrating big data with prominent technologies like machine learning, artificial intelligence (AI), and the Internet of Things (IoT) has the potential to revolutionize smart and sustainable tourism.

Despite the potential benefits, the use of big data for sustainable tourism remains limited, and its implementation poses challenges related to governance, data privacy, ethics, stakeholder communication, and regulatory compliance. Addressing these challenges is crucial to ensure the responsible and sustainable use of these technologies. Therefore, strategies must be developed to navigate these issues through a proper governing system.

To bridge the existing gap, this dissertation focuses on the current research on big data for sustainable tourism and strategies for governing its use and implementation in conjunction with emerging technologies. Specifically, this PhD dissertation centers on mobile positioning data (MPD) as a case due to its unique benefits, challenges, and complexity. Also, this project introduces three frameworks, namely: 1) a conceptual framework for digital twins (DT) for smart and sustainable tourism, 2) a documentation framework for architectural decisions (DFAD) to ensure the successful implementation of the DT technology as a governance mechanism, and 3) a big data governance framework for official statistics (BDGF). This dissertation not only presents these frameworks and their benefits but also investigates the issues and challenges related to big data governance while empirically validating the applicability of the proposed frameworks…(More)”.

Citizen Engagement in Evidence-informed Policy-making: A Guide to Mini-publics

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by WHO: “This guide focuses on a specific form of citizen engagement, namely mini-publics, and their potential to be adapted to a variety of contexts. Mini-publics are forums that include a cross-section of the population selected through civic lottery to participate in evidence-informed deliberation to inform policy and action. The term refers to a diverse set of democratic innovations to engage citizens in policy-making. This guide provides an overview of how to organize mini-publics in the health sector. It is a practical companion to the 2022 Overview report, Implementing citizen engagement within evidence-informed policy-making. Both documents examine and encourage contributions that citizens can make to advance WHO’s mission to achieve universal health coverage…(More)””

The Radical How

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Public Digital: “…We believe in the old adage about making the most of a crisis. We think the constraints facing the next government provide an unmissable opportunity to change how government works for the better.

Any mission-focused government should be well equipped to define, from day one, what outcomes it wants to bring about.

But radically changing what the government does is only part of the challenge. We also need to change how government does things. The usual methods, we argue in this paper, are too prone to failure and delay.

There’s a different approach to public service organisation, one based on multidisciplinary teams, starting with citizen needs, and scaling iteratively by testing assumptions. We’ve been arguing in favour of it for years now, and the more it gets used, the more we see success and timely delivery.

We think taking a new approach makes it possible to shift government from an organisation of programmes and projects, to one of missions and services. It offers even constrained administrations an opportunity to improve their chances of delivering outcomes, reducing risk, saving money, and rebuilding public trust…(More)”.

AI as a Public Good: Ensuring Democratic Control of AI in the Information Space

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the Forum on Information and Democracy: “…The report outlines key recommendations to governments, the industry and relevant stakeholders, notably:

  • Foster the creation of a tailored certification system for AI companies inspired by the success of the Fair Trade certification system.
  • Establish standards governing content authenticity and provenance, including for author authentication.
  • Implement a comprehensive legal framework that clearly defines the rights of individuals including the right to be informed, to receive an explanation, to challenge a machine-generated outcome, and to non-discrimination
  • Provide users with an easy and user-friendly opportunity to choose alternative recommender systems that do not optimize for engagement but build on ranking in support of positive individual and societal outcomes, such as reliable information, bridging content or diversity of information.
  • Set up a participatory process to determine the rules and criteria guiding dataset provenance and curation, human labeling for AI training, alignment, and red-teaming to build inclusive, non-discriminatory and transparent AI systems…(More)”.

Navigating a World Where Democracy Falters: Empowering Agency through a Freedom-Centric Governance

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Noura Hamladji: “…The principle of checks and balances, introduced by Montesquieu, a fundamental concept at the core of any democratic system, is under attack in many countries. It asserts that only power can effectively constrain power and has led to the principle of independence and separation between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of governance. Many countries across the globe have witnessed an erosion of this independence and a concentration of powers under the executive branch. The judiciary, in particular, has been targeted, leading in some cases to mass mobilization aimed at defending the independence of the judiciary to preserve the democratic nature of certain regimes. 

Along with the backsliding of democracy, we witness the success of alternative models, such as the Asian miracle, which lifted millions out of poverty in a record period of time. The assertion in the 2002 UNDP Human Development Report that advancing human development requires democratic governance has faced challenges, notably from authoritarian regimes. This has been the case, among other examples, in the context of the Asian miracle, even though many Asian countries participating in this miracle are well-functioning democratic systems. Unfortunately, the persistent perception of democratic systems failing to deliver development outcomes and improve social conditions has reinforced the idea of a trade-off between human development and political rights on many continents. 

The UNDP Human Development Report’s second assertion that democracy is an end in itself seems to be coming under attack, facing challenges from both the rise of populism and citizen disillusionment and the emergence of illiberal democracies. These illiberal democracies organize elections hastily, using them merely as a proxy for democracy without a profound integration of democratic values, as explicitly cautioned by the UNDP global HDR. Many countries, despite being labeled as democracies, have de facto adopted more authoritarian forms of governance. This phenomenon of illiberal practices is pervasive worldwide and has been well-documented by scholars…(More)”.