Rethinking Privacy in the AI Era: Policy Provocations for a Data-Centric World

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Jennifer King, Caroline Meinhardt: “In this paper, we present a series of arguments and predictions about how existing and future privacy and data protection regulation will impact the development and deployment of AI systems.

➜ Data is the foundation of all AI systems. Going forward, AI development will continue to increase developers’ hunger for training data, fueling an even greater race for data acquisition than we have already seen in past decades.

➜ Largely unrestrained data collection poses unique risks to privacy that extend beyond the individual level—they aggregate to pose societal-level harms that cannot be addressed through the exercise of individual data rights alone.

➜ While existing and proposed privacy legislation, grounded in the globally accepted Fair Information Practices (FIPs), implicitly regulate AI development, they are not sufficient to address the data acquisition race as well as the resulting individual and systemic privacy harms.

➜ Even legislation that contains explicit provisions on algorithmic decision-making and other forms of AI does not provide the data governance measures needed to meaningfully regulate the data used in AI systems.

➜ We present three suggestions for how to mitigate the risks to data privacy posed by the development and adoption of AI:

1. Denormalize data collection by default by shifting away from opt-out to opt-in data collection. Data collectors must facilitate true data minimization through “privacy by default” strategies and adopt technical standards and infrastructure for meaningful consent mechanisms.

2. Focus on the AI data supply chain to improve privacy and data protection. Ensuring dataset transparency and accountability across the entire life cycle must be a focus of any regulatory system that addresses data privacy.

3. Flip the script on the creation and management of personal data. Policymakers should support the development of new governance mechanisms and technical infrastructure (e.g., data intermediaries and data permissioning infrastructure) to support and automate the exercise of individual data rights and preferences…(More)”.

i.AI Consultation Analyser

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

New Tool by AI.Gov.UK: “Public consultations are a critical part of the process of making laws, but analysing consultation responses is complex and very time consuming. Working with the No10 data science team (10DS), the Incubator for Artificial Intelligence (i.AI) is developing a tool to make the process of analysing public responses to government consultations faster and fairer.

The Analyser uses AI and data science techniques to automatically extract patterns and themes from the responses, and turns them into dashboards for policy makers.

The goal is for computers to do what they are best at: finding patterns and analysing large amounts of data. That means humans are free to do the work of understanding those patterns.

Screenshot showing donut chart for those who agree or disagree, and a bar chart showing popularity of prevalent themes

Government runs 700-800 consultations a year on matters of importance to the public. Some are very small, but a large consultation might attract hundreds of thousands of written responses.

A consultation attracting 30,000 responses requires a team of around 25 analysts for 3 months to analyse the data and write the report. And it’s not unheard of to get double that number

If we can apply automation in a way that is fair, effective and accountable, we could save most of that £80m…(More)”

Private tech, humanitarian problems: how to ensure digital transformation does no harm

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Access Now: “People experiencing vulnerability as a consequence of conflict and violence often rely on a small group of humanitarian actors, trusted because of their claims of neutrality, impartiality, and independence from the warring parties. They rely on these humanitarian organisations and agencies for subsistence, protection, and access to basic services and information, in the darkest times in their lives. Yet these same actors can expose them to further harm. Our new report, Mapping Humanitarian Tech: exposing protection gaps in digital transformation programmes, examines the partnerships between humanitarian actors and private corporations. Our aim is to show how these often-opaque partnerships impact the digital rights of the affected communities, and to offer recommendations for keeping people safe…(More)”.

Designing and implementing mission-oriented policies: Tools and resources from the field

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Anna Goulden and Professor Rainer Kattel: “This policy report investigates the tools and resources used globally by practitioners to support them in design, implementation or evaluation of mission-oriented policies. In recent years, ‘policy toolkits’ (often called ‘playbooks’, ‘guides’, ‘resource libraries’ or similar) have become increasingly widespread in policy communities. In the context of policy approaches such as mission-oriented innovation, toolkits and many tools can be a means of bridging the gap between theory and practice by providing practitioners with tangible resources to support them in their work. As part of this work, IIPP engaged with practitioners in its Mission-Oriented Innovation Network (MOIN) to discuss cases of mission-oriented policy tools and toolkits developed in the field – and current and future needs for tool development. 

The work has consisted of three strands, which will be explored in this report:

  • Mapping the external environment: what does the current landscape of policy toolkits and resources look like, particularly for mission-oriented innovation?
  • Understanding practitioner needs: what are the operational contexts, use cases and needs of practitioners in terms of tools?
  • Scoping future priorities: what is the role of IIPP in the field and how is it developing?…(More)”

Six ways to democratise city planning 

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by DemocracyNext: “To live in thriving and healthy cities, we propose six possible ways to instigate systemic changes that can democratise the governance of urban planning decisions through Citizens’ Assemblies. Depending on a city’s current starting point, at least one, if not multiple, of these options can be seen as an initial ‘way in’ to begin making systemic changes to urban planning decision making. The six ways are outlined as different entry points on the following page…(More)”.

Data Science, AI and Data Philanthropy in Foundations : On the Path to Maturity

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Filippo Candela, Sevda Kilicalp, and Daniel Spiers: “This research explores the data-related initiatives currently undertaken by a pool of foundations from across Europe. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that has investigated the level of data work within philanthropic foundations, even though the rise of data and its importance has increasingly been recognised in the non-profit sector. Given that this is an inaugural piece of research, the study takes an exploratory approach, prioritising a comprehensive survey of data practices foundations are currently implementing or exploring. The goal was to obtain a snapshot of the current level of maturity and commitment of foundations regarding data-related matters…(More)”

Toward a 21st Century National Data Infrastructure: Managing Privacy and Confidentiality Risks with Blended Data

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: “Protecting privacy and ensuring confidentiality in data is a critical component of modernizing our national data infrastructure. The use of blended data – combining previously collected data sources – presents new considerations for responsible data stewardship. Toward a 21st Century National Data Infrastructure: Managing Privacy and Confidentiality Risks with Blended Data provides a framework for managing disclosure risks that accounts for the unique attributes of blended data and poses a series of questions to guide considered decision-making.

Technical approaches to manage disclosure risk have advanced. Recent federal legislation, regulation and guidance has described broadly the roles and responsibilities for stewardship of blended data. The report, drawing from the panel review of both technical and policy approaches, addresses these emerging opportunities and the new challenges and responsibilities they present. The report underscores that trade-offs in disclosure risks, disclosure harms, and data usefulness are unavoidable and are central considerations when planning data-release strategies, particularly for blended data…(More)”.

Developing skills for digital government

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

OECD “review of good practices across OECD governments”: “Digital technologies are having a profound impact on economies, labour markets and societies. They also have the potential to transform government, by enabling the implementation of more accessible and effective services. To support a shift towards digital government, investment is needed in developing the skills of civil servants. This paper reviews good practices across OECD countries to foster skills for digital government. It presents different approaches in public administration to organising training activities as well as opportunities for informal learning. It also provides insights into how relevant skills can be identified through competence frameworks, how they can be assessed, and how learning opportunities can be evaluated….(More)”

Enabling Data-Driven Innovation : Learning from Korea’s Data Policies and Practices for Harnessing AI 

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the World Bank: “Over the past few decades, the Republic of Korea has consciously undertaken initiatives to transform its economy into a competitive, data-driven system. The primary objectives of this transition were to stimulate economic growth and job creation, enhance the nation’s capacity to withstand adversities such as the aftermath of COVID-19, and position it favorably to capitalize on emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (AI). The Korean government has endeavored to accomplish these objectives through establishing a dependable digital data infrastructure and a comprehensive set of national data policies. This policy note aims to present a comprehensive synopsis of Korea’s extensive efforts to establish a robust digital data infrastructure and utilize data as a key driver for innovation and economic growth. The note additionally addresses the fundamental elements required to realize these benefits of data, including data policies, data governance, and data infrastructure. Furthermore, the note highlights some key results of Korea’s data policies, including the expansion of public data opening, the development of big data platforms, and the growth of the AI Hub. It also mentions the characteristics and success factors of Korea’s data policy, such as government support and the reorganization of institutional infrastructures. However, it acknowledges that there are still challenges to overcome, such as in data collection and utilization as well as transitioning from a government-led to a market-friendly data policy. The note concludes by providing developing countries and emerging economies with specific insights derived from Korea’s forward-thinking policy making that can assist them in harnessing the potential and benefits of data…(More)”.

Consumer vulnerability in the digital age

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

OECD Report: “Protecting consumers when they are most vulnerable has long been a core focus of consumer policy. This report first discusses the nature and scale of consumer vulnerability in the digital age, including its evolving conceptualisation, the role of emerging digital trends, and implications for consumer policy. It finds that in the digital age, vulnerability may be experienced not only by some consumers, but increasingly by most, if not all, consumers. Accordingly, it sets out several measures to address the vulnerability of specific consumer groups and all consumers, and concludes with avenues for more research on the topic…(More)”.