Explore our research on agricultural data governance in Kenya, India, and Colombia. We aim to support civil society with a human-rights based approach to digital food systems. Join us in promoting equitable practices for sustainable agriculture.
Better Deal for Data - Practical Data Governance for the Social Sector
Better Deal for Data - practical data governance for the social sector.
A Polycentric Governance Lens on Data Infrastructures
Funding policies for data infrastructure promote open data sharing to drive positive social impact. However, concerns regarding the long-term management of data within and across distributed infrastructures can hinder data sharing. We draw upon the concept of polycentric governance to demonstrate how collaborative practices of data curation, in preparing and maintaining data for (future) sharing, provide a solid foundation for understanding data governance within data infrastructures. Based on a qualitative case study of a distributed ecological network, we investigate the conditions under which data are managed as a shared resource by local actors to ensure the long-term (re)usability of data. We contribute to CSCW by conceptualising data curation as a complex form of governance practice with multiple centres of decision-making, each of which operates with some degree of autonomy in data infrastructures. A polycentric governance lens on data infrastructures advances the CSCW conception of data curation as a collective governance practice that can cultivate a data democracy culture within and across organisations, empower individuals to be accountable for their data, and foster a mindset shift toward decentralised data governance.
Data-owning Democracy or Digital Socialism?
This article contrasts two reform proposals articulated in recent debates about how to democratize the digital economy: data-owning democracy and digital socialism. A data-owning democracy is a political-economic regime character-ized by the
Indigenous Knowledges and Data Governance Protocol — Indigenous Innovation Initiative
Between March 2020 and March 2021, the Indigenous Innovation Initiative co-created the Indigenous Knowledges and Data Governance Protocol with the community, to guide how we collect and use Indigenous Knowledges and Data. Click on the image below to learn more about this Protocol. Since then, t
Indigenous Data Sovereignty (DDN3-A11)
This article explores Indigenous data sovereignty, identifies some of the data-related challenges faced by Indigenous Peoples and highlights the work done to overcome these challenges.
Preventing AI extractivism: the case for braiding indigenous data justice with ABS for stronger AI data governance
Artificial-intelligence systems are rapidly reproducing colonial extractivism by harvesting Indigenous linguistic, biometric, geospatial, and ecological data without consent, compensation, or accountability. Biotechnology offers a blueprint for curbing such practices: the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Nagoya Protocol obligate users of genetic resources to obtain Prior Informed Consent, negotiate Mutually Agreed Terms, and share benefits fairly. No comparable framework restrains the digital appropriation that underpins many AI products. Consequently, corporations and states monetize Indigenous knowledge systems under the banners of “open data” and “scientific neutrality,” eroding rights affirmed in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). In response to this rising risk of AI extractivism, we make the case for a binding, sui generis ABS protocol for AI data governance. First, through a series of case studies we demonstrate that AI extraction mirrors the colonial and biopiracy controversies that originally triggered Access‑and‑Benefit‑Sharing (ABS) rules in biotechnology. Second, we translate those rules into a digital register by braiding two Indigenous data‑governance frameworks—OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession) and the CARE Principles (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics)—inside the ABS triad of consent, terms, and benefit‑sharing. The resulting model grounds technical safeguards in relational accountability and Indigenous legal orders. Such an instrument would compel transparent negotiations with Indigenous rights‑holders, assign enforceable authority over data across the AI lifecycle, and require equitable redistribution of the economic value generated by models trained on Indigenous data. Embedding ABS principles into AI governance offers a decolonial pathway that centers Indigenous epistemologies, promotes ethical foresight, and transforms AI from a vehicle of digital colonialism into a space for algorithmic justice.
Digital Socialism?
What opportunities does the new feedback infrastructure of data capitalism offer for non-market forms of social coordination? Hayek and the Calculation Debate revisited in the age of big data.
Role of digitalization in environment, social and governance, and sustainability: Review-based study for implications
Digitalization gives people access to a vast network of untapped data, which has the potential to help society and the environment. Smart systems connected to the internet can systematically provide a unique opportunity to solve difficulties related to long-term sustainability. The goals are to create an egalitarian, ecologically sustainable, and healthy society. Technological resources are envisioned as game-changing instruments. Three key concerns integration benefits are highlighted here: (i) sustainable development goals, (ii) socio-economic development, and (iii) the role of digital technology in environmental sustainability. This viewpoint describes the potential that digitization can create a future sustainable society. The technological network would unite the urban and rural worlds under a shared banner of sustainable development, keeping all social elements in the loop. Nations that take a comprehensive strategy will be able to provide equitable growth and an efficient, sustainable, and digital existence for their citizens. As a result, digitization provides better living conditions, active public involvement, clean governance, and transparency in public welfare programs and processes. People who are well-informed, self-aware, and digitally equipped will be better learners, thinkers, reformers, participators, and change and growth agents, marching forward on sustainable progress. The advantages of digitization in hastening the transition to sustainable industrial processes and improving people's health and happiness are explored. Finally, the perspective encapsulates the advantages of digitization by offering a holistic vision of how technology could aid in addressing major challenges such as endangered world biodiversity and climate change.
Intro_to_Awareness_and_Competency_in_Data_Governance
Thread 5 Introduction: ICT Awareness & Competency in Data Governance https://www.aliexpress.com/item/33004770035.html 1 May 4, 2021 Moore’s Law Prepared by: Ken Lazarus Ben Koo
Common Knowledge: Citizen-led data governance for better cities
Key lessons from the DECODE pilots and tips on how other cities and governments can apply the technologies and methods.
JamiiAfrica
Deploying Africa’s Civic OS—a decentralized, secure, and AI-driven digital infrastructure that enables citizens to hold authorities accountable while giving institutions credible, data-backed incentives to respond
Data Feminism
Today, data science is a form of power. It has been used to expose injustice, improve health outcomes, and topple governments. But it has also been used to d...
Driving Finance for Sustainable Food Systems: A Roadmap to Implementation for Financial Institutions and Policy Makers
Food systems play a central role in all societies and are fundamental to sustainable development. The environmental and social impacts of the global food system are interconnected and affect diverse...
Sovereignty and Landscape | Simon Wardley | 15 comments
X : What is digital sovereignty? Me : I was asked that question by some friends within Government at the beginning of this month. I know some have been working on the idea, which is very encouraging, but I gave my tuppence worth of a definition. "Digital sovereignty is a country's ability to make its own decisions about the technology it uses, the data it creates, and how digital systems work in service of its people rather than being forced to accept choices made by other entities. This requires continuous situational awareness of the economic and technological landscape to anticipate changes, maintain strategic advantage, and shape international digital norms. Digital sovereignty is achieved through strategic control over critical digital assets and relationships, extending from public sector systems to the broader digital ecosystem affecting citizens and economic interests." The key is choice. You are sovereign if you retain the ability to make your own decisions rather than being forced to accept the decisions of others. This doesn't mean you need to own the entire tech stack, or all the data but you do need to maintain control over critical assets and relationships. This can be achieved by many means not just by conflict with others but through co-operation and collaboration (i.e. all the forms of competition matter). You also can consciously compromise, accepting some loss of sovereignty in one space to gain sovereignty in another. Anyway, I quite like the Mike Bracken description https://lnkd.in/eFjzcAdr "Digital sovereignty is the agency and capacity of any organisation to make intelligent, informed choices to shape its digital future by design". I used to do a lot of work on sovereignty many years ago, so if you want to know more about my view and how to achieve this, well I have a series of hopefully useful but somewhat introductory posts. Sovereignty and Landscape https://lnkd.in/eku2X_Ea Societal versus Market benefit https://lnkd.in/eXxkCv-K Whose interests are you serving? https://lnkd.in/eAgHS5wc | 15 comments on LinkedIn
Generative AI and the Digital Commons — The Collective Intelligence Project
The aim of this paper is to build models of governance for generative foundation models that enable broadly shared benefit. Our initial hypothesis is that data is a high-value lever of governance. Many of these models are trained on publicly available data and use public infrastructure, but 1) may d
MyData
The human-centric approach to data is aimed at a fair, sustainable, and prosperous digital society. In such a society, people get value from their data and set the agenda on how it is used. And for organisations, the ethical use of data is always the most attractive option.
