PreprintPDF Available

Algorithmic Governance & AI in the Post COVID-19 Society // Herrigintza Algoritmikoa eta Adimen Artifiziala Post COVID-19 Gizartean

  • June 2020
DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.33413.58081/2
Authors:
Igor Calzada at Cardiff University
Igor Calzada
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.
Download file PDF
Read file
Download citation

Abstract

We may dare to ask about rationale behind the recent devotion caused by Artificial Intelligence (AI). Whether it could be produced by the fear or, by contrast, it stems from the inner ignorance and uncertainty that blind us by attempting to give a quick explanation to a massive technological disruption directly caused by COVID19. AI is not a new phenomenon as such, despite the fact that what it could be new is the way AI is already interfering in citizens’ daily life functions and services shaping them with a deep intensity as a result of the processing capacity of AI. Nonetheless, (i) little is known so far about the relationship between AI and governance, or what is worst, (ii) AI is being deployed without considering democratic accountability and far from our public eye and scrutiny. Acknowledging the complexity of such topic, this article constructively aims to analyse the ongoing technopolitical transformations occurring in the aftermath of the coronavirus crisis for the governance model of the Basque Country. This article is targeted to the political left (either Basque or Spanish nationalist) in pursuit of avoid delaying the work that should be implemented in response to questions, challenges, and policies for XXI. century algorithmic governance. The article concludes through three-intertwined-layer approach: (i) the first approach lists AI functional uses; (ii) the second approach presents brefly several AI projects being currently developed in different European countries; (iii) ultimately, a strategic roadmap lead to stakeholders in the Basque Country is outlined. To cite this article: Calzada, Igor (2020), Herrigintza Algoritmikoa eta Adimen Artifiziala Post COVID-19 Gizartean // Algorithmic Governance & AI in the Post COVID-19 Society. Galde 29. pp. 46-48. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33413.58081/1. Available at/Retrieved from: https://www.galde.eu/es/herrigintza-algoritmikoa-adimen-artifiziala/ Online publication date: 7th July 2020
Content uploaded by Igor Calzada
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Igor Calzada on Jul 05, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Galde 29
-
uda/2020
46
Testuinguru geopolitiko, digital,
eta post
COVID-19
pandemiko globala.
Igor
Calzada*
H
errigintza Algoritmikoa
eta
Adimen Artifiziala
P
ost COVID-19 Gizartean
H
errigintza Algoritmikoa
eta
Adimen Artifiziala
P
ost COVID-19 Gizartean
Zein ote da jada normalitate hitzaren esanahia orain? Ia
oharkabean,
2020
ko Martxo-Ekainaren artean esponentzial-
ki jazo diren azken lau hilabeteetan, ez ote dugu jada zen-
tzuz hustu edo agian beste zentzu batekin bete dugu hi-
tzaren esanahia. Agian, erresilientzia globalizatuz, gure
bizitzak, harremanak, eta lanak hauskorrak bihurtuarazi ditu-
gu jada: hori da guztia. Honen aurrean ordea, badira duinta-
sunaren aldeko deia egin dutenak ere: #DemocratizingWork
1
manifestuan bildu diren akademiko eta sinatzaileak, beste
gauza askoren artean, ekonomia digitalaren araubideak bir-
planteatzea eskatzen dute. Abagune sistemiko honen au-
rrean, zer egin beharko luke ezker politikoak? Balizkoak al
zaizkio jada garai bateko kontsigna eta sozio-ekonomia digi-
talizatua ulertu, aztertu eta oldartzeko moldeek?
Tartean, adimen artifiziala eszenatoki globalean sartu
eta erdi-erdian kokatu da, mirakulu algoritmiko gisa guz-
tia konpondu eta bideratzeko promesarekin (teorian). Sortu
dira berau kudeatu eta eskeintzen dituzten enpresak eta
hamaika egitasmo. Hala ere, gutxiago hitzegiten da bali-
zko garapen aukeren ingurun bezala alboko kalte/ezjakin-
tasunak behartutako ondorioen inguruan. Sarri kode bina-
rio bat planteatzen digute, alternatibarik ezpalego gisa:
gure libertate zibilen edo osasun publikoaren artean auke-
ratu beharko dugu zelatatze-teknologikoaren begirada al-
goritmikoaren pean? Zer ‘normalitate klase’ ekarri digu
beraz post COVID-19 gizarteak? Gizabanakoaren aukerak
eta ekintza kolektiborako bideak murrizten dituen norma-
litatea? Ez dirudi oso normalitate adimenduna, horrela
bada behintzat.
Testuinguru globalean, post
COVID-19
gizartearen oldar-
ketak, adimen artifizialaren norgehiagoka areagotu egin du,
hiru paradigma digitalak lubakituz heuren artean. Halaber,
post
COVID-19
gizartearen kudeaketan azaleratu eta anpli-
fikatu egin dira aspalditik herrigintza eta demokrazia uler-
tzeko somatzen ziren joerak eta kontraesanak paradigma
ezberdinen artean:
(i) Txina aspalditik ari da esperimentatzen
Social Credit
System
(SCS) delakoa, hiritarren kontrola gailendu eta to-
talitarimo/nazionalismo teknologiko
2
gisako paradigma bati
gradualki helduz.Bestalde Huawei enpresa berritzailearen,
5G teknologiaren aitzakipean, estrategia oso esanguratsua
izaten ari da EB-rekiko hurbiltze-estrategiko bat aurreikus-
ten delarik.
COVID-19
a, Txinaren estrategia geopolitiko global
osoaren abiapuntua izan da. Harrigarria dirudi oraindik Txinak
berariazko informazioa partekatu ez izana krisiaren hasieran,
eta kontrara, diplomazia lehun bat abian jartzea Europako
zenbait herrialderekin, beraien irudia zaindu eta ziber-di-
plomaziaz apaintze-aldera.
(ii) Shozana Zuboff-ek,
Harvard University
-ko adituak,
maixuki azaldu bezala,
GAFA
gisa ezagunak diren
Google
,
Apple
,
Facebook
eta
Amazon
, zelatatze-kapitalismoa (
survei-
llance capitalism
3
) aspalditik praktikatzen darraite. Orainartean
ezinezkotzat genituen aliantzak ere ikusi ditugu ere: Apple eta
Google-en arteko elkarlanak konfirmatu baino ez du egiten
norgehiagoka eta paradigmen arteko lehia.
Contact tracing
egitasmoaren arira, lanketa eta estrategia parekide eta
amankomuna darabilte. Itzelezko inflexio puntua da gure
pribatasun eta datuen erabilgarritasunari dagokionez, Sili-
con Valley-ren esku utziz gure datu eta subirautza teknolo-
gikoa aurrerantzean. Non geratzen da estatuen soberania?
Eta zein da Europaren erantzuna honen aurrean? Alterna-
barik Europan, Europar Batasunaren (EB) alderik?
To cite this article:
Calzada, I. (2020),
Herrigintza Algoritmikoa eta Adimen Artifiziala Post COVID-19 Gizartean //
Algorithmic Governance & AI in the Post COVID-19 Society.
Galde 29. pp. 46-48. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33413.58081/2.
Available at/Retrieved from: https://www.galde.eu/es/ Online publication date: 7th July 2020
Galde 29
- verano/2020
47
...
«Europako Batzordea aspaldi ari da bide estrategiko hau atontzen. Azken batean, hiri eta eskualde
mailako datu-ekosistemak izango baitira gure bizimodua ‘gobernatuko’ duten lehengaiak;
adimen artifiziala elikatuko duen lehengai berbera. Alegia, gure herrigintza (eta ekonomia)
zeharo baldintzatuko duena. Konturatzen al gara honen garrantziaz?
(iii) EB-k lan aintzindaria egin du azken urteotan Da-
tuak Babesteko Arautegi Orokorra (DBAO, GDPR bezala
ezaguna dena) sortzeko. Une honetan debate interesga-
rri bat sortu delarik pribatasuna bermatu vs etekin soziala
ahalbidetu teknologiek COVID-19-a antzematen laguntze-
ko.
Contact tracing
-aren aitzakipean, eredu zentralizatu
eta dezentralizatuak egon dira ezbaian. Hala ere, berriki,
eta agian hori da orain erronka nagusia, Alemania eta Fran-
tziako ekonomia ministroek, Europako subirautza tekno-
logikoaren abiapuntua litzatekeen Gaia-X proiektua aur-
keztu dute. Zeresan handiko neurria da dudarik gabe eta
Europako Batasunak datu eta ekonomia digitalaren pers-
pektiba ‘progresistagoa’ landu nahi dugunon zientzilarien-
tzat (bederen). EuropakoBatzordea aspaldi ari da bide es-
trategiko hau atontzen. Azken batean, hiri eta eskualde
mailako datu-ekosistemak izango baitira gure bizimodua
‘gobernatuko’ duten lehengaiak; adimen artifiziala elika-
tuko duen lehengai berbera. Alegia, gure herrigintza (eta
ekonomia) zeharo baldintzatuko duena. Konturatzen al
gara honen garrantziaz?
Herrigintza algoritmikoa, nazio algoritmikoa
Honek zerikusia du Euskal Herriaren herrigintza, estrate-
gia digitala eta subirautza teknologikoak bete beharko
lukeen paperaz, aurrean dugun ekonomia eta gizarte digi-
tala ulertu eta gutxieneko berme demokratikoei eusteko
bada ere
4
. Agian hemen,
stakeholder-
rak diren sektore
publiko, pribatu, zibila, baina baita-ere akademia eta gi-
zarte ekintzaile/aktibistak lerratzea falta litzatete euskal
nazio algoritmiko bat erdietsi nahiko lukeen ezker poli-
tikoari (Calzada 2018a, 2018d). Hemen, EBren aterkipean,
blockchain
5
bezalako arkitektura tekno-politikoak oso ba-
liagarriak suerta litezke gure hiru eremu administratiboen
artean (eta batipat gure metropolizatze-prozesua kontuan
edukiz) protokolo dezentralizatu eta sareratuak egikariza-
tzeko. Helburua hiritarrenganako gerturatze eta zerbitzu
publikoen hobekuntza litzateke. Nola jarri adimen artifi-
ziala euskal nazio algoritmiko baten zerbitzura gizarte on-
gizatea bermatuz? Nola ekidin Euskal Herria eta bere hiri-
tarrak zelatatuak daudela etengabe
Big Tech
edota
estatuaren (egungo espainiarraren baina baita ere etorki-
zuneko balizko euskal-estatuarenaren) kontrolaz? Halaber,
hiritar digitalen emanzipatze-sozial eta digitala jomugan,
desiragarria/beharrezkoa litzateke euskal estatu bat, hain
zuzen ere, panoptiko digitalaren kontzeptutik urrun? Ba
al da holakorik? Estonia al da eredua? Seguru? Posible al
da egungo mundu konplexu, interkonektatu, interdepen-
diente, eta mugaz jositako honetan estatu bat izatea? On-
dorioz, euskal estatu batek demokratizazio eskeintza za-
balena egitea ezinbestekoa litzateke. Beraz, estatugintza
demokratikoa ez da posible izango nazio algoritmiko mo-
duan operatzen hasten ezpagara behintzat. Estatu espai-
nirrak babesten al ditu egun euskal hiritarron eskubide
digitalak? Baina…eta balizko euskal estatu batek, babes-
tuko al lituzke? Horratx eztabaida eraikitzaile batetarako
osagaiak: estatugintza-ereduak, balizko hiritarren eskubi-
de digitalen babesa eta ondorioz, abertzale/ez-abertzaleen
ezker paradigmaren berrikusketaren beharra.
Gure hartu-eman guztiak daude zipriztinduta kodetu-
tako sare, datu, eta hartu-emanez: tekno-hiritar gara tek-
no-post-
COVID-19
gizartean. Determinismo teknologikoa
ekiditeko bidea subirautza garatzea da, baina Europar hiri-
eskualde, nazio eta estatuekin elkartasun eta lankidetza
internazionalisten bidez (izan Estonia, edo izan Katalunia).
Euskal errepublika bat nazio algoritmiko gisara operatzen
irudikatu ahal dugu Europar federazio batean? Kontzertu
berri honetan jokatzeko baliatu behar ditugu gure auke-
rak eta datu azpiegitura, erakunde eta ekosistema egitu-
raturik gabe, gureak egingo du. Ezingo ditugu euskal hiri-
tarren eskubide digitalak babestu aurreratzean, ezta
beraien lan, bizi, eta duintasun baldintzak bermatu. Eta…ez
al dira nahiko arrazoi euskal naziogintzaren narratiba be-
rritu ez-dogmatiko bati ekiteko (izan abertzalea edo-ta
nazio tekno-politiko kripto-kulturalaren bertsio vasquista,
akaso)? Euskal hiritar digitalok, balizko erabakitze-eskubi-
dea, eskubide digitalen aldarriarekin artikulatzea egokitu
zaigu aurki; post
COVID-19
gizarteak jarri digun abiadura
da honakoa. Gai al gara erronkari heltzeko?
Adimen artifizialaren erraminta-kaxa,
E
uropako zenbait proiektu eta
bide-orri estrategikoa
E
uskal
H
errirako.
Sarritan iruditzen zaigu, gurean ezagunak ez direnak, beste
inon garatzen ari ez direnik, etorkizuna eraikitzen ez dire-
nik. Adimen artifiziala gertatzen ari da Europako leku as-
kotan eta batipat sektore publikotik abiatuta, herrigintza
diseinatzen den botere publikoetatik. Hori da hain zuzen
AI Watch
6
proiektuan garatzen diharduguna zientzilari eta
aditu talde batek. Erabilerak asko dira: (i) audio prozesa-
doreak, (ii) chatbots-ak
7
, (iii) robotika kognitiboa, (iv) ikus-
Galde 29
-
uda/2020
48
...
pen konputerizatua, (v) aditu/arauetan oinarritutako eraki-
menerako sistema adimendunak, (vi) ezagutzaren kudeake-
ta, (vii) ikasketa automatikoa/ikasketa sakona
8
,
(viii) hizkun-
tza naturalen prozesamendua, (ix) analitika prediktiboak,
simulazio eta datu bisualizatzeak, eta (x) segurtasun ana-
litikak. Erabilera guztia hauek, ondorio teknopolitiko gar-
biak dituzte.
Europan, Estonia, Belgika, Suedia, Lituania, Herbehe-
reak, Polonia eta estatu espainiarrean, maila administrati-
bo ezberdinetako erakunde publikoak adimen artifiziala
aplikatzen dihardute. Egitasmo guztiek, hiritarren ongiza-
te eta datu-kudeaketan eragina izango dute. Estoniako
gobernu zentrala, ‘Satikas’ proiektuarekin, gai ekono-
mikoetarako datuak depuratzen ari dira. Belgikan, go-
bernu federala, osasunerakosistema prediktibo bat
garatzen dihardu. Suedian, maila lokaletan ari da zain-
tza eta hautaketa prozesuetan txertatzen. Lituanian
gobernu zentraletik hiritarren esperientzia hobetzea
dute xede. Herbehereetan, maila lokalean, ongizate
politiken fondoen erabilera egokitzen dabiltza. Polo-
nian, maila lokalean ere, gai ekonomikoen esleipena nola
gauzatzen den hobetzea dute helburu. Azkenik, estatu es-
painiarrean, txosten faltsuen identikatzean ari dira adimen
artifiziala aplikatzen.
Euskal Herrian, hiru eremu administratiboen egoeratik eta
egoera ezberdinetik abiatuta (aukera eta mehatxuak, ahulgu-
neak eta arnasguneak, kontuan izanda), bide-orri estrategiko
baten proposamenarekin amaitu nahiko nuke. Euskal eragi-
leei dagokie lanketa eta lehentasunak finkatzea:
1. Naziogintza eta estatugintzan: datu-estrategia eta
gure tokia agentzia pan-Europearretan.
2. Hiru barruti administratiboen arteko proiektu pilo-
to eta esperimentalak
blockchain
teknologiarekin.
3. Eskubide digitalen (pribatasuna eta jabetza) ingu-
ruan egun abian dauden manifestu eta hiri-koalizietan sar-
tzea gure hiriburuen bitartez.
4. Sektore publikoan be-
rrikuntza aplikatu hiritar algorit-
mikoak jada kontsiderazio zen-
trala izanik (Estoniako ereduari
jarriki).
5. Historian zehar garatu
ahal izan dugun eredu sozio-eko-
nomiko komunitarista egunera-
tzea, kooperatibagintza jatorri-
zko eredua, plataforma eta datu
kooperagintza bilakatuz, eragile
anitzen artean.
6. Subirautza teknologikoa,
erakunde eta aparailuetatik hara-
go, hiritartasunean zentratzea (gi-
zarte berrikuntzan).
*Dr. Igor Calzada,
MBA, FeRSA,
O
xfordeko unibertsitatea
eta E
uropako Batzordea
DG JRC
1
https://democratizingwork.org/
2
https://bylinetimes.com/
2020/04/07
/the-coronavirus-crisis-digi-
tal-surveillance-and-technological-totalitarianism/
3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=hIXhn
-
WUmMvw&feature=emb_title
4
https://medium.com/rsa-journal/data-spaces-and-democracy-
178054e9fc2b
5
Bloke-katea edo Blockchain gisa ezagutzen dena
(BC
, bloke-
katea ingelesez) banatutako datu-base bat da, datu bat argitaratu
ondoren hura ezaldatzeko diseinatutako bloke-kateeko satua. Blo-
keei aurreko katearen beste bloke bati buruzko metainformazioak
gehitzen zaizkie denbora-lerrobatean; horrela, teknika kriptogra-
fikoei esker, bloke batean dagoen informazioa errefusatu edo edi-
tatu ahal izateko, ondorengo bloke guztiak aldatzea beste biderik
ez dago. https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloke-kate
6
https://ec.europa.eu/knowledge4policy/ai-watch/topic/ai-public-
sector_en
7
Chatbot bat testu nahiz entzumen bidezko metodoen bitartez
elkarrizketa bat jarraitzen duen programa informatikoa da. https:/
/eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatbot
8
Ikaskuntzasakona (ingelesez deep learning) ikasketa automa-
tikoko metodo bat da. Ez da ataza espezifiko bat ebazteko algo-
ritmoa, modu automatikoan eta datuetatik abiatuz ikasteko di-
seinatutako metodoa baizik. https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Ikaskuntza_sakon
9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_twin
7. Etika, datu pertsonal geolokalizatu, soslaiatze, mo-
delizazio, eta testu semantikoen analisiak, gure politika
publikoen zerbitzura jartzea: populazio sintetikoen mo-
delizazioak eta
digital twins-
ak
9
erabiltzen hastea poli-
tika publikoak diseinatzeko, esperimentazio partehartzai-
learen bidetik.
8. Europear esparruan kasu, proiektu eta egitasmo
propioekin lehen lerroan egotea, berrikuntza sozialean
puntako gune bat garela ekintzekin demostratuz.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
AI Watch. Defining Artificial Intelligence 2.0. Towards an operational definition and taxonomy of AI for the AI landscape
Technical Report
Full-text available
  • Oct 2021
We present here the second edition of our research aimed at establishing an operational definition of artificial intelligence (AI), to which we refer to in the activities of AI Watch. This edition builds on the first report, published in February 2020, and complements it with several recent developments. Since then, the European Commission has proposed a regulatory framework on artificial intelligence (AI Act) that establishes a legal definition of AI, which we incorporate in the current review. In addition to this legal definition, an operational definition is still needed to better delineate the boundaries and analysis of the AI Watch AI landscape. The proposed AI Watch operational definition consists of an iterative method providing a concise taxonomy and list of keywords that characterise the core domains of the AI research field, complemented by transversal topics such as AI applications or ethical and philosophical considerations - in line with the wider monitoring objective of AI Watch. The AI taxonomy is designed to inform the AI Watch AI landscape analysis and is also expected to cover applications of AI in closely related technological domains, such as robotics (in a broader sense), neuroscience or internet of things. The literature considered for the qualitative analysis of existing definitions and taxonomies has been enlarged to include recently published reports from the three complementary perspectives considered in this work: policy, research and industry. Therefore, the collection of definitions published between 1955 and 2021 and the summary of the main features of the concept of AI appearing in the relevant literature is another valuable output of this work. Finally, alternative approaches to study AI are also briefly presented in this new edition of the report. These include the classification of AI according to: families of algorithms and the theoretical models behind them; cognitive abilities reproduced by AI; functions performed by AI. Applications of AI may be grouped also according to other dimensions, like the economic sector in which such applications are found, or their business functions. These approaches, complementary to the taxonomy used for the analysis of the AI Watch international landscape, are useful to gain a wider understanding of the AI domain, and suitable to be used in studies related to these dimensions.
View
The Power of Data From the Global South: Environmental Civic Tech and Data Activism in China
Article
Full-text available
  • Mar 2020
This article explores how an established environmental nongovernmental organization, the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs (IPE), engaged in data activism around a civic tech platform in China, expanding the space for public participation. By conducting participatory observation and interviews, along with document analysis, we describe three modes of data activism that represent different mechanisms of civic oversight in the environmental sphere. Unlike contentious data activism in the Western context, we argue that IPE activists’ data practices are localized in the specific sociopolitical culture shaped by China’s authoritarian system. These practices do not involve contentious political criticism against the government, although they have monitoring functions. By finding the middle ground between confrontation and state control, IPE activists participated in the political process as policy entrepreneurs who pursue their political goals in cooperation with the government. Rather than mobilizing radical contestation, environmental data activism in China works as a constructive alternative to the denial of the existing government system, transmitting public input into the policy-making process.
View
Beyond the nation-state: territory, solidarity and welfare in a multiscalar Europe
Article
Full-text available
  • Apr 2020
The European welfare state has been founded on the nation-state, within stable boundaries. The nation provided affective solidarity. The state provided the institutional capacity. Coterminous boundaries for the economy and welfare bounded social and economic interests and encouraged social compromises. With spatial rescaling, economic regulation, welfare provision and political identities have migrated to new levels. Regions and cities are presented as in competition for economic development. States seek levels of regulation above and below the state. This may lead to a ‘race to the bottom’ as regions deregulate and cut spending to attract mobile capital. New regional identities may undermine national solidarity. Theories of fiscal federalism have placing redistributive competences at the highest level to avoid this. Yet, there may be a race to the top as regions experiment in new forms of social provision. New forms of affective solidarity may emerge at new scales. All public policies, and not just explicitly social ones, have a distributive effect. Differences are emerging across substate territories in welfare priorities and distributional policies. These often depend on the constitution of regional policy communities and social compromises. There is no simple race to the bottom or to the top, but a variety of experiences.
View
How to Design AI for Social Good: Seven Essential Factors
Article
Full-text available
The idea of artificial intelligence for social good (henceforth AI4SG) is gaining traction within information societies in general and the AI community in particular. It has the potential to tackle social problems through the development of AI-based solutions. Yet, to date, there is only limited understanding of what makes AI socially good in theory, what counts as AI4SG in practice, and how to reproduce its initial successes in terms of policies. This article addresses this gap by identifying seven ethical factors that are essential for future AI4SG initiatives. The analysis is supported by 27 case examples of AI4SG projects. Some of these factors are almost entirely novel to AI, while the significance of other factors is heightened by the use of AI. From each of these factors, corresponding best practices are formulated which, subject to context and balance, may serve as preliminary guidelines to ensure that well-designed AI is more likely to serve the social good.
View
Data Ecosystems for Protecting European Citizens' Digital Rights
Article
Full-text available
  • Mar 2020
This viewpoint paper aims to spark a debate by (i) presenting the need for developing data ecosystems in Europe that meet the social and public good while committing to democratic and ethical standards; (ii) suggesting a taxonomy of data infrastructures and institutions to support this need; (iii) using the case study of Barcelona as the flagship city trailblazing a critical policy agenda of smart cities to show the limitations and contradictions of the current state of affairs; and (iv), ultimately, proposing a preliminary roadmap for institutional and governance empowerment that could enable effective data ecosystems in Europe. This viewpoint paper draws on lessons learnt in previous publications available in the Sustainability (Calzada, 2018), Regions (Calzada and Cowie, 2017; Calzada, 2019), Zenodo (Calzada and Almirall, 2019), RSA Journal (Calzada, 2019), and IJIS (Calzada, 2020) journals, and ongoing and updated fieldwork about the Barcelona case study stemming from an intensive fieldwork action research that started in 2017. The methodology used in these publications was based on the mixed-method technique of triangulation via action research encompassing (i) in-depth interviews, (ii) direct participation in policy events, and (iii) desk research. The case study was identified as the most effective methodology. This viewpoint paper, drawing from lessons learnt from the Barcelona case study, elucidates on the need to establish pan-European data infrastructures and institutions—collectively data ecosystems—to protect citizens’ digital rights in European cities and regions. The paper reveals three main priorities proposing a preliminary roadmap for local and regional governments: (i) advocacy, suggesting the need for city and regional networks; (ii) governance, requiring guidance and applied, neutral, and non-partisan research in policy; and (iii) pan-European agencies, leading and mobilising data infrastructures and institutions at the European level. From the very beginning, this viewpoint paper acknowledges its ambition, and thus its limitations, and clarifies its attempt to provide just an overview rather than a deep research analysis. This viewpoint paper presents several research limitations and implications regarding the scope. The paper starts by presenting the need for data ecosystems, then structures this need through two taxonomies, all illustrated through the Barcelona case study, and finally, concludes with a roadmap consisting of three priorities. The paper employs previous published and ongoing fieldwork findings in Barcelona as a way to lead and thus encourage the proliferation of more cases (CCDR). This paper presents practical implications for local and regional authorities of the CCDR network. As such, the main three priorities of the preliminary roadmap could help those European cities and regions already part of the CCDR network to establish and build operational data ecosystems by establishing a comprehensive pan-European policy from the bottom-up that aligns with the timely policy developments advocated by the European Commission. This paper can inspire policy-makers by providing guidelines to better coordinate among a diverse set of cities and regions in Europe. In previous research, data ecosystems were not directly related to digital rights amidst the global digital geopolitical context and, more specifically, were not connected to the two taxonomies (on data infrastructures and institutions) that could be directly applied to a case study, like the one presented about Barcelona. Thus, this viewpoint paper shows novelty and originality by also opening up (based on previous fieldwork action research) a way to take strategic action to establish a pan-European strategy among cities and regions through three specific priorities. This paper can ultimately support practice and lead to new research and policy avenues. To cite this article: Calzada, I. and Almirall, E. (2020), Data Ecosystems for Protecting European Citizens' Digital Rights, Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, Vol. 14 No. 2. DOI: 10.1108/TG-03-2020-0047 To access the article: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/TG-03-2020-0047/full/html
View
Will Covid-19 be the end of the global citizen?
Preprint
Full-text available
  • Mar 2020
Over the last decades, globalisation has led to a new class of global citizens. While the access to this global citizenship is still not spread evenly, many have enjoyed the freedom to move, work, and travel with no limits. However, this cosmopolitan globalisation rhetoric of a borderless world has been drastically slowed down by Covid-19. This pandemic has introduced a new level of uncertainty in global affairs and led many to question whether citizens will be able to continue enjoying the freedom of movement once the crisis is over. To share this article: https://apolitical.co/en/solution_article/will-covid-19-be-the-end-of-the-global-citizen To cite this article: Calzada, I. (2020), Will Covid-19 be the end of the global citizen? Apolitical. Retrieved from: https://apolitical.co/en/solution_article/will-covid-19-be-the-end-of-the-global-citizen DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11942.27208/1.
View
On the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak and the Smart City Network: Universal Data Sharing Standards Coupled with Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Benefit Urban Health Monitoring and Management
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 2020
As the Coronavirus (COVID-19) expands its impact from China, expanding its catchment into surrounding regions and other countries, increased national and international measures are being taken to contain the outbreak. The placing of entire cities in 'lockdown' directly affects urban economies on a multilateral level, including from social and economic standpoints. This is being emphasised as the outbreak gains ground in other countries, leading towards a global health emergency, and as global collaboration is sought in numerous quarters. However, while effective protocols in regard to the sharing of health data is emphasised, urban data, on the other hand, specifically relating to urban health and safe city concepts, is still viewed from a nationalist perspective as solely benefiting a nation's economy and its economic and political influence. This perspective paper, written one month after detection and during the outbreak, surveys the virus outbreak from an urban standpoint and advances how smart city networks should work towards enhancing standardization protocols for increased data sharing in the event of outbreaks or disasters, leading to better global understanding and management of the same.
View
Disease and Democracy: Political Regimes and Countries Responsiveness to COVID-19
Article
A widely held belief is that autocratic governments have been more effective in reducing the movement of people to curb the spread of COVID-19. Using daily information on lockdown measures and geographic mobility across more than 130 countries, we find that autocratic regimes have indeed imposed more stringent lockdowns and relied more on contact tracing. However, we find no evidence that autocratic governments were more effective in reducing travel, and evidence to the contrary: compliance with the lockdown measures taken was higher in countries with democratically accountable governments. Exploring a host of potential mechanisms, we provide suggestive evidence that democratic institutions are associated with attitudes that support collective action, such as mounting a coordinated response to a pandemic.
View
Digitalization and the geographies of production: Towards reshoring or global fragmentation?
Article
  • Apr 2020
The relationship between digitalization and the governance and geographies of global value chains has not been explored systematically. This contribution discusses how digitalization affects the variables that determine the localization of manufacturing, i.e. the substitution of work through automation, the deepening of the customer–producer relationship, the rationalization of distribution through digitalized logistics networks, and the increased modularization of supply chains through standardization and ‘platformisation’. The results of the theoretical exploration defy expectations of a straightforward ‘reshoring’ of production through the combined effects of automation and benefits through a co-localization of companies within their target markets. Tendencies that would support a stronger integration of production in advanced economies are instead being undercut by ongoing countertrends towards fragmentation. The contradictory tendencies of a geographical integration of manufacturing and target markets on the one hand and geographical fragmentation through sophisticated supply-chain organization on the other will affect the technologically facilitated processes of value chain restructuring in a sector-specific manner.
View
Taking it personal? Investigating regime personalization as an autocratic survival strategy
Article
  • Mar 2020
Personalist autocracy is on the rise globally. Dictators’ increasing tendency to concentrate power in their own hands has major implications for the political stability of autocracies. However, the exact nature of this impact is unclear. On the one hand, regime personalization has been linked to a reduction in the likelihood of coups. On the other hand, personalization has also been linked to an increase in the likelihood of civil war. This article reconciles these findings and argues that personalization involves a trade-off between different kinds of threats against a dictator. By increasing the degree of personalization, dictators reduce their vulnerability to insider challenges while at the same time increasing their vulnerability to outsider challenges. These expectations are corroborated by a time-series cross-sectional analysis of a global sample of autocratic regimes. The findings help shed light on recent instances of longstanding autocrats being overthrown during episodes of mass mobilization.
View

Linked Research

Data Ecosystems for Protecting European Citizens' Digital Rights
Article
March 2020
Igor Calzada · Esteve Almirall