The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 1 to 9.
Workshop on Big Data in India: Benefits, Harms, and Human Rights (Delhi, October 01)
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/big-data-in-india-benefits-harms-and-human-rights-oct-01-2016
<b>CIS welcomes you to participate in the workshop we are organising on Saturday, October 01 at India Habitat Centre, Delhi, to discuss benefits, harms, and human rights implications of big data technologies, and explore potential research questions. A quick RSVP will be much appreciated.</b>
<p> </p>
<h4>Workshop invitation: <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/big-data-in-india-invitatation-to-workshop/at_download/file">Download</a> (PDF)</h4>
<h4>Workshop agenda: <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/big-data-in-india-workshop-agenda/at_download/file">Download</a> (PDF)</h4>
<hr />
<p>In the last few years, there has been an emergence of the discourse of big data viewing it as an instrument not just for ensuring efficient, targeted and personalised services in the private sector, but also for development, social and policy research, and formalising and monetising various sections of the economy. This possibility is premised upon the idea that there is great knowledge that resides in both traditional and new forms of data made possible by our digital selves, and that we may now have the capability to tap into that knowledge for insights across diverse sectors like healthcare, finance, e-governance, education, law enforcement and disaster management, to name but a few. Alongside, various commentators have also pointed to the new problems and risks that big data could create for privacy of individuals through greater profiling, for free speech and economic choice by strengthening monopolistic tendencies, and for socio-economic inequalities by making existing disparities more acute and facilitating algorithmic bias and exclusion.</p>
<p>From a regulatory perspective, big data technologies pose fundamental challenges to the national data regulatory frameworks that have existed since many years. The nature of collection and utilisation of big data, which is often not driven by immediate purpose of the collected data, conflict with the principles of data minimisation and collection limitation that have been integral to data protection laws globally. This compels us to revisit existing theories of data governance. Additionally, use of big data in public decision-making highlights the question of how algorithmic control and governance must be regulated. This raises concerns around taking determining a balanced position that recognises the importance of big data, including for development actions, and ensures unhindered innovation with simultaneous focus on greater transparency and anonymisation to protect individual privacy, and various big data risks faced by population groups. In order to answer these questions, we need to begin with identifying the different harms and benefits of big data that could arise through its use across sectors and disciplines, especially in the context of human rights.</p>
<p>This workshop is designed around an extensive study of current and potential future uses of big data for governance in India that CIS has undertaken over the last year. The study focused on key central government projects and initiatives like the UID project, the Digital India programme, the Smart Cities Challenge, etc.</p>
<p>We will initiate the workshop with a detailed presentation of our findings and key concerns, which will then shape the discussion agenda of the workshop. We look forward to discuss aspects of big data technologies through the entry points of harms, opportunities, and human rights.</p>
<p>The final session of the workshop will focus on identifying key research questions on the topic, and exploring potential alliances of scholars and organisations that can drive such research activities.</p>
<p>We look forward to making this a forum for knowledge exchange for our friends and colleagues attending the discussion and discuss the opportunity to for potential collaboration.</p>
<p><strong>RSVP:</strong> Please send an email to Ajoy Kumar at <<a href="mailto:ajoy@cis-india.org">ajoy@cis-india.org</a>>.</p>
<p><strong>Organisers:</strong> Amber Sinha <<a href="mailto:amber@cis-india.org">amber@cis-india.org</a>> and Sumandro Chattapadhyay <<a href="mailto:sumandro@cis-india.org">sumandro@cis-india.org</a>>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/big-data-in-india-benefits-harms-and-human-rights-oct-01-2016'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/big-data-in-india-benefits-harms-and-human-rights-oct-01-2016</a>
</p>
No publishervanyaDevelopmentBig DataInternet GovernanceDigital SecurityDigital IndiaDigitisationDigital subjectivitiesBiometricsBig Data for DevelopmentE-GovernanceDigital Rights2016-09-28T05:53:55ZEventBig Data Governance Frameworks for 'Data Revolution for Sustainable Development'
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-governance-frameworks-for-data-revolution-for-sustainable-development
<b>A key component of the process to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals is the call for a global 'data revolution' to better understand, monitor, and implement development interventions. Recently there has been several international proposals to use big data, along with reconfigured national statistical systems, to operationalise this 'data revolution for sustainable development.' This analysis by Meera Manoj highlights the different models of collection, management, sharing, and governance of global development data that are being discussed.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>1.</strong> <a href="#1">What are the Sustainable Development Goals?</a></p>
<p><strong>2.</strong> <a href="#2">The Need for a Data Revolution</a></p>
<p><strong>3.</strong> <a href="#3">Big Data: Characteristics and Use for Development</a></p>
<p><strong>3.1.</strong> <a href="#3-1">Characteristics of Big Data</a></p>
<p><strong>3.2.</strong> <a href="#3-2">Using Big Data for Development</a></p>
<p><strong>4.</strong> <a href="#4">Sustainable Development and Data Rights</a></p>
<p><strong>5.</strong> <a href="#5">Governance Frameworks Proposed</a></p>
<p><strong>5.1.</strong> <a href="#5-1">UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network</a></p>
<p><strong>5.2.</strong> <a href="#5-2">The UN DATA Revolution Group</a></p>
<p><strong>5.3.</strong> <a href="#5-3">Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development</a></p>
<p><strong>5.4.</strong> <a href="#5-4">The Global Partnership for Sustainable Development of Data</a></p>
<p><strong>5.5.</strong> <a href="#5-5">The World Economic Forum (WEF)</a></p>
<p><strong>5.6.</strong> <a href="#5-6">Dr. Julia Lane - A Quadruple Data Helix</a></p>
<p><strong>5.7.</strong> <a href="#5-7">Data Pop Alliance</a></p>
<p><strong>6.</strong> <a href="#6">Conclusion</a></p>
<p><strong>7.</strong> <a href="#7">Endnotes</a></p>
<p><strong>8.</strong> <a href="#8">Author Profile</a></p>
<hr />
<p>Speaking on Big Data, Dan Ariely commented that, "<em>Everyone talks about it, nobody really knows how to do it, and everyone thinks everyone else is doing it, so everyone claims they are doing it</em>" <strong>[1]</strong>. This offers a useful insight into the lack of adequate discourse on the kind of governance and accountability frameworks that are needed to facilitate the developmental, sustainable, and responsible uses of big data.</p>
<p>In light of the recent international proposals to use big data to track the Sustainable Development Goals, this paper highlights the different models of management, sharing, and governance of data that are being discussed, and concurrently, how they conceptualise the various rights around big data and how are they to be protected.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="1">1. What are the Sustainable Development Goals?</h2>
<p>The Sustainable Development Goals, otherwise known as the Global Goals, build on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Adopted on 1 January 2016, these universally applicable 17 goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, seek to end all forms of poverty, fight inequalities, tackle climate change and address a range of social needs like education, health, social protection and job opportunities over the next 15 years <strong>[2]</strong>.</p>
<p> </p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/big-data-gov-framework_un-sdg.png" alt="Sustainable Development Goals" />
<h6>Source: UN Data Revolution Group, <em><a href="http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/A-World-That-Counts2.pdf">A World that Counts</a></em>, 2014, p.12.<br /></h6>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="2">2. The Need for a Data Revolution</h2>
<p>An overwhelming cause of concern regarding the precursor to the SDGs, the MDGs, is the data unavailability to monitor their progress. For instance, the figure below indicates that there is no five-year period when the availability of MDG related data is more than 70% of what is required. Entire groups of people and key issues remain invisible <strong>[3]</strong>. Lack of data is not only a problem for global statisticians, but also for people whose needs and demands remain invisible due to lack of quantitative representation of the same. For instance, the incidences of gender related crimes when not recorded could lead to a misconception on the achievement of the MDG of gender equality.</p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/big-data-gov-framework_undrg_mdg-data.png" alt="UN Stats - Percentage of MDG data currently available for developing countries by nature of source." />
<h6>Source: UN, <a href="http://i0.wp.com/www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/english_SDG_17goals_poster_all_languages_with_UN_emblem_1.png">Sustainable Development Goals</a>.<br /></h6>
<p>As the new goals (SDGs) cover a wider range of issues it is clear that a far higher level of detail is required. To this effect the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the post-2015 agenda has called for a "data revolution for sustainable development" <strong>[4]</strong>.</p>
<p>The world is experiencing a Data Revolution and a "data deluge." One estimate has it that 90% of the data in the world has been created in the last 2 years. As Eric Schmidt of Google in 2010 famously said, "<em>There were 5 exabytes of information created between the dawn of civilization through 2003, but that much information is now created every 2 days</em> <strong>[5]</strong>.</p>
<p>In its report <em>A World that Counts</em>, the UN Data Revolution Group defines the data revolution as an explosion in the volume of data, the speed with which data are produced, the number of producers of data, the dissemination of data, and the range of things on which there is data, coming from new technologies such as mobile phones and the “internet of things”, and from other sources, such as qualitative data, citizen-generated data and perceptions data <strong>[6]</strong>.</p>
<p>This data revolution in the context of sustainable development has been defined by the UN Secretary General’s Independent Expert Advisory Group (IEAG) as follows:</p>
<blockquote>[T]he integration of data coming from new technologies with traditional data in order to produce relevant high‐quality information with more details and at higher frequencies to foster and monitor sustainable development. This revolution also entails the increase in accessibility to data through much more openness and transparency, and ultimately more empowered people for better policies, better decisions and greater participation and accountability, leading to better outcomes for the people and the planet <strong>[7]</strong>.</blockquote>
<p>The majority of such “data coming from new technologies” is what can be called big data. It is data being generated in real-time, in high velocity and volume, in a variety of forms and formats, and on an increasing range of phenomenon that are being mediated by digital technologies – from governance to human communication. Further, a good part of such big data is not about the content of the phenomenon concerned but about its process – for example, Call Detail Records are generated for each mobile phone call a person makes and it contains data about the process of the call (time, location, duration, recipient, etc.) but not about the content of the call. Big data about various governmental and human processes are becoming a crucial instrument for documenting and monitoring of the same.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="3">3. Big Data: Characteristics and Use for Development</h2>
<h3 id="3-1">3.1. Characteristics of Big Data</h3>
<p>The simplest definition of big data is that it is a dataset of more than 1 petabyte. The US Bureau of Labour Statistics terms it to be non-sampled data, characterized by the creation of databases from electronic sources whose primary purpose is something other than statistical inference <strong>[8]</strong>.</p>
<p>The characteristics which broadly distinguish Big Data are sometimes called the “3 V’s”: more volume, more variety and higher rates of velocity <strong>[9]</strong>. Big data sources generally share some or all of these features <strong>[10]</strong>:</p>
<ul><li>Digitally generated,</li>
<li>Passively produced,</li>
<li>Automatically collected,</li>
<li>Geographically or temporally trackable, and</li>
<li>Continuously analysed.</li></ul>
<p>Increasingly, Big Data is recognised as creating "new possibilities for international development" <strong>[11]</strong>. It could provide faster, cheaper, more granular data and help meet growing and changing demands. It was claimed, for example, that "<em>Google knows or is in a position to know more about France than INSEE</em>" <strong>[12]</strong>, its highly resourceful national statistical agency. To illustrate, Global Pulse gives the example of a hypothetical small household facing soaring commodity prices, particularly food and fuel <strong>[13]</strong>. They have the options of:</p>
<ul><li>Getting part of their food at a nearby World Food Programme distribution centre,</li>
<li>Reducing mobile usage,</li>
<li>Temporarily taking their children out of school,</li>
<li>Calling a health hotline when children show signs of malnutrition related diseases, and</li>
<li>Venting about their frustration on social media.</li></ul>
<p>Such a systemic shock of food insecurity will prompt thousands of households to react in roughly similar ways. These collective behavioural changes may show up in different digital data sources:</p>
<ul><li>WFP might record that it serves twice as many meals a day,</li>
<li>The local mobile operator may see reduced usage,</li>
<li>UNICEF data may indicate that school attendance has dropped,</li>
<li>Health hotlines might see increased volumes of calls reporting malnutrition, and</li>
<li>Tweets mentioning the difficulty to “afford food” might begin to rise.</li></ul>
<p>Thus the power of real-time, digital data to predict paths for development is immense. Amassing such a large volume of data which tracks practically every aspect of social behavious can revolutionize the field of official statistics and policy making.</p>
<p>Two points to be noted are: 1) all these data sources are not available for comparison in the real-time by default, so one task before using big data in developmental work is to make data from different sources available across agencies and make them comparable, and 2) finding repeating patterns within large data sets, sourced from varied origins, can not only allow for monitoring but also (statistically) predicting future possibilities and implications for development action.</p>
<h3 id="3-2">3.2. Using Big Data for Development</h3>
<p>There are several international organizations attempting to use such data.</p>
<p>Global Pulse, a United Nations initiative, launched by the Secretary-General in 2009, seeks to leverage innovations in digital data, rapid data collection and analysis to help decision-makers gain a real-time understanding of how crises impact vulnerable populations. To this end, Global Pulse is establishing an integrated, global network of Pulse Labs, anchored in Pulse Lab New York, to pilot the approach at country level <strong>[14]</strong>.</p>
<p>The Global Working Group on Big Data for Official Statistics, created in May 2014, pursuant to Statistical Commission, makes an inventory of ongoing activities and examples regarding the use of big data, addresses concerns related to methodology, human resources, quality and confidentiality, and develops guidelines on classifying various types of big data sources <strong>[15]</strong>.</p>
<p>There have been applications even on a national and individual level. For instance, in 2013, various sources reported that the CIA had admitted to the “full monitoring of Facebook, Twitter, and other social networks” to identify links between events and sequences or paths leading to national security threats, ultimately leading to forecasting future activities and events <strong>[16]</strong>.</p>
<p>In the field of conflict prevention is the emerging applications to map and analyse unstructured data generated by politically active Internet use by academics, activists, civil society organizations, and even general citizens. In reference to Iran’s post-election crisis beginning in 2009, it is possible to detect web-based usage of terms that reflect a general shift from awareness towards mobilization, and eventually action within the population <strong>[17]</strong>.</p>
<p>The "Big Data, Small Credit" report proposes that financial inclusion can be promoted by allowing consumers with mobile phones to access credit formally as customers <strong>[18]</strong>.</p>
<p>At a national level, the biggest challenge for most big data projects is the limited or restricted access the government agencies have to potential big data sets owned by the private sector <strong>[19]</strong>. The overall consensus is that Big Data to track SDGs must complement traditional data sources <strong>[20]</strong>. This is because big data may not always be available for the entire population, or include a diverse enough sample of the population. Moreover most big data projects measure development indicators through a correlation which may not always be correct unlike official data. For instance big data might help in predicting lowered household income through reducing mobile bills while traditional data directly collects income statistics.</p>
<p>In a survey by the Global Working Group on Big Data for Official Statistics <strong>[21]</strong>, it was found that only a few countries have developed a long-term vision for the use of big data, while many are formulating a big data strategy. Most countries have not yet defined business processes for integrating big data sources and results into their work and do not have a defined structure for managing big data projects.</p>
<p>Thus there exists a need to identify a governance framework for big data for sustainable development, not only at national level, but also at the international level.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="4">4. Sustainable Development and Data Rights</h2>
<p>Any discussion on governance frameworks would be incomplete without defining the kind of data rights they must seek to protect.</p>
<p>In the famous parable of the six blind men and the elephant they conclude that the elephant is like a wall, snake, spear, tree, fan or rope, depending upon where they touch. Similarly Internet experiences of individual users (what they touch) often contrast drastically with different views (what they conclude) on what would constitute data rights.</p>
<p>The IEAG in its report has identified the following set of data related rights, but has not defined any actual framework or process for ensuring them (yet) <strong>[22]</strong>:</p>
<ul><li>Right to be counted,</li>
<li>Right to an identity,</li>
<li>Right to privacy and to ownership of personal data,</li>
<li>Right to due process (for example when data is used as evidence in proceedings, or in administrative decisions),</li>
<li>Freedom of expression,</li>
<li>Right to participation,</li>
<li>Right to non-discrimination and equality, and</li>
<li>Principles of consent.</li></ul>
<p>Personal data is broadly defined as "<em>any information relating to an identified or identifiable individual</em>" <strong>[23]</strong>. Often primary data producers (users of services and devices generating data) are unaware of individual privacy infringements <strong>[24]</strong>.</p>
<p>A survey by the Global Working Group on Big Data for Official Statistics found that only a few countries have a specific privacy framework for big data, while most apply the privacy framework for traditional statistics to big data as well <strong>[25]</strong>.</p>
<p>Conventionally, safeguards against the re-use of big data to protect data rights have involved the “anonymization” or “de-identification” of data, to conceal individual identities. Global Pulse, for instance, is putting forth the concept of Data Philanthropy, whereby "<em>corporations take the initiative to anonymize (strip out all personal information) their data sets and provide this data to social innovators to mine the data for insights, patterns and trends in real-time or near real-time</em>" <strong>[26]</strong>. There however exists a debate on whether data can actually be anonymized effectively. Several state that data can never be effectively de-anonymized due to technological challenges <strong>[27]</strong>. For instance, when the New York City government released de-anonymised data sets of New York cab drivers were made re-identifiable by approaching a separate method. Within less than 2 hours work, researchers knew which driver drove every single trip in this entire dataset. It would be even be easy to calculate drivers’ gross income, or infer where they live <strong>[28]</strong>.</p>
<p>Even the OECD opines that the current model of limiting identifiability of individuals is unsustainable. It recommends moving towards one where the focus is on transparency around how data is being used, rather than preventing specific types of use, stating that - "<em>research funding agencies and data protection authorities should collaborate to develop an internationally recognized framework code of conduct covering the use of new forms of personal data, particularly those generated via network communication. This framework, built on best practice procedures for consent from data subjects, data sharing and re-use, anonymization methods, etc., could be adapted as necessary for specific national circumstances</em>" <strong>[29]</strong>.</p>
<p>Thus, there is a push for the arguement that the historical approaches to protecting privacy and confidentiality — namely, <em>informed consent</em> and <em>anonymity</em> — no longer hold <strong>[30]</strong>. Some have even suggested using big data itself to keep track of user permissions for each piece of data to act as a legal contract <strong>[31]</strong>.</p>
<p>There is an overall consensus that any legal or regulatory mechanisms set up to mobilise the 'data revolution for sustainable development' should protect the data rights of the people <strong>[32]</strong>, without any clear agreement on what these rights may be.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="5">5. Governance Frameworks Proposed</h2>
<p>A largely unanswered question that is posed in light of the emerging consensus on the use of Big Data for monitoring SDGs is within what sort of governance frameworks these data collection and analysis methods will operate. Methods of collection and the key actors involved in data analysis, management, storage and coordination. The role of NGOs and CSOs, if any, within these systems must be delineated. Certain key global organizations and eminent researchers have suggested the following models.</p>
<h3 id="5-1">5.1. UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network</h3>
<p>In 2012, the UN Secretary-General launched the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) to mobilize global scientific and technological expertise to promote practical problem solving for sustainable development, including the design and implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) <strong>[33]</strong>. It has proposed the following.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>The Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (IAEGSDG) and the United Nations Statistical Commission are to establish roadmaps for strengthening specific data collection tools that enable the monitoring of SDG indicators.</p>
<p><strong>Analysis</strong></p>
<p>Based on discussions with a large number of statistical offices, including Eurostat, BPS Indonesia, the OECD, the Philippines, the UK, and many others, 100 is recommended to be the maximum number of global indicators to analyse data for which NSOs can report and communicate effectively in a harmonized manner. This conclusion was strongly endorsed during the 46th UN Statistical Commission and the Expert Group Meeting on SDG indicators <strong>[34]</strong>.</p>
<p>Specialist indicators developed by thematic communities must be used for data analysis as they include input and process metrics that are helpful complements to official indicators, which tend to be more outcome-focused. For example, the UN Inter-Agency Group on Child Mortality Estimation has developed a specialist hub responsible for analysing, checking, and improving mortality estimation. This is a leading source for child morality information for both governments and non-governmental actors <strong>[35]</strong>.</p>
<p>Research arms of private companies such as Microsoft Research, IBM research, SAS, and R&D arms of telecom companies could directly partner with official statistical systems to share sophisticated analysing techniques <strong>[36]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Management</strong></p>
<p>Four levels of monitoring, national, regional, global, and thematic, should be "<em>organized in an integrated architecture</em>" <strong>[37]</strong>.</p>
<p>Countries must decide individually whether official data must be complemented with non-official indicators from big data which can add richness to the monitoring of the SDGs.</p>
<p>Where possible, regional monitoring should build on existing regional mechanisms, such as the Regional Economic Commissions, the Africa Peer Review Mechanism, or the Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development <strong>[38]</strong>.</p>
<p>To coordinate thematic monitoring under the SDGs, each thematic initiative may have one or more lead specialist agencies or “custodians” as per the IAEG-MDG monitoring processes. Lead agencies would be responsible for convening multi-stakeholder groups, compiling detailed thematic reports, and encouraging ongoing dialogues on innovation. These thematic groups can become testing grounds in launching a data revolution for the SDGs, trialling new measurements and metrics that in time can feed into the global monitoring process with annual reports <strong>[39]</strong>.</p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/big-data-gov-framework_unsdsn_monitoring.png" alt="UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network - Schematic illustration with explanation of the indicators for national, regional, global, and thematic monitoring." />
<h6>Schematic illustration with explanation of the indicators for national, regional, global, and thematic monitoring.<br />Source: UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, <em><a href="http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/150612-FINAL-SDSN-Indicator-Report1.pdf">Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals: Launching a Data Revolution for the SDGs</a></em>, 2015, p.3.<br /></h6>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>Monitoring the SDG agenda will require substantive improvements in national statistical capacity. Assessments of existing capacity to fulfil SDG monitoring expectations must be undertaken and needs be integrated into National Strategies for the Development of Statistics (NSDSs) <strong>[40]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Coordination</strong></p>
<p>A Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data must be established and a World Forum on Sustainable Development Data be convened in 2016 to create mechanisms for ongoing collaboration and innovation.</p>
<p>A high-level, powerful group of businesses and states must convene the various data and transparency sustainable development initiatives under one umbrella.</p>
<p>To ensure comparability, Global Monitoring Indicators must be harmonized across countries by one lead technical or specialist agency which will additionally coordinate data standards and collection and provide technical support.</p>
<p>The following table indicates the suggested Lead Agencies for individual SDGs <strong>[41]</strong>.</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Number</strong></td>
<td><strong>Sustainable Development Goal</strong></td>
<td><strong>Lead Agencies</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>1.</td>
<td>No Poverty</td>
<td>World Bank, UNDP, UNSD, UNICEF, ILO, FAO, UN-Habitat, UNISDR, WHO, CRED, UNFPA, and UN Population Division</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>2.</td>
<td>No Hunger</td>
<td>FAO, WHO, UNICEF, and Internal Fertilizer Industry Associaton (IFA)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>3.</td>
<td>Good Health</td>
<td>WHO, UN Population Division, UNICEF, World Bank, GAVI, UN AIDS, and UN-Habitat</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4.</td>
<td>Quality Education</td>
<td>UNESCO, UNICEF, and World Bank</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>5.</td>
<td>Gender Equality</td>
<td>UNICEF, UN Women, WHO, UNSD, ILO, UN Population Division, and UNFPA</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>6.</td>
<td>Clean Water and Sanitation</td>
<td>WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), FAO, UN Water, and UNEP</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>7.</td>
<td>Renewable Energy</td>
<td>Sustainable Energy for All, IEA, WHO, World Bank, and UNFCC</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>8.</td>
<td>Good Jobs and Economic Growth</td>
<td>IMF, World Bank, UNSD, and ILO</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>9.</td>
<td>Innovation and Infrastructure</td>
<td>World Bank, OECD, UNIDO, UNFCC, UNESCO, and ITU</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>10.</td>
<td>Reduced Inequalities</td>
<td>UNSD, World Bank, and OECD</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>11.</td>
<td>Sustainable Cities and Communities</td>
<td>UN-Habitat, Global City Indicators Facility, WHO, CRED, UNISDR, FAO, and UNEP</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>12.</td>
<td>Responsible Consumption</td>
<td>EITI, UNCTAD, UN Global Compact, FAO, UNEP Ozone Secretariat, WBCSD, GRI, IIRC, and Global Compact</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>13.</td>
<td>Climate Action</td>
<td>OECD DAC, UNFCCC, and IEA</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>14.</td>
<td>Life below Water</td>
<td>UNEP-WCMC, IUCN, and FMC</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>15.</td>
<td>Life on Land</td>
<td>FAO, UNEP, IUCN, and UNEP- WCMC</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>16.</td>
<td>Peace and Justice</td>
<td>UNODC, WHO, UNOCHA, UNCHR, IOM, OCHA, OECD, UN Global Compact, EITI, UNCTAD, UNICEF, UNESCO, and Transparency International</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>17.</td>
<td>Partnership for the Goals</td>
<td>BIS, IASB, IFRS, IMF, WIPO, WTO, UNSD, OECD, World Bank, OECD DAC, and SDSN</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3 id="5-2">5.2. The UN DATA Revolution Group</h3>
<p>The group constituted by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in August 2014, is an Independent Expert Advisory Group with the aim of making concrete recommendations on bringing about a 'data revolution for sustainable development' <strong>[42]</strong>. In its report, <em>A World that Counts</em>, it makes the following recommendations <strong>[43]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>Clear standards on data collection methods must be developed based on the UN Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics. Periodic audits must be conducted by professional and independent third parties to ensure data quality.</p>
<p>Governments, civil society, academia and the philanthropic sector must work together strengthening statistical literacy so that all people have capacity to input into and evaluate the quality of data.</p>
<p>Social entrepreneurs, private sector, academia, media, civil society and other individuals and institutions must be engaged globally with incentives (prizes, data challenges) to encourage data sharing.</p>
<p><strong>Analysis</strong></p>
<p>A SDGs Analysis and Visualisation Platform is to be set up for fostering private-public partnerships and community-led peer-production efforts for data analysis.</p>
<p>A dashboard on ”the state of the world” will engage the UN, think-tanks, academics and NGOs in analysing, and auditing data.</p>
<p>Academics and scientists are to analyse data to provide long-term perspectives, knowledge and data resources at all levels.</p>
<p>The “Global Forum of SDG-Data Users” will ensure feedback loops between data producers, processors and users to improve the usefulness of data and information produced.</p>
<p>A “SDGs data lab” to support the development of a first wave of SDG indicators is to be established mobilizing key public, private and civil society data providers, academics and stakeholders working with the Sustainable Development Solutions Network.</p>
<p><strong>Storage</strong></p>
<p>A “world statistics cloud” will store data and metadata produced by different institutions but according to common standards, rules and specifications.</p>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>Civil society organisations must share data and processing methods with private and public counterparts on the basis of agreements. They must hold governments and companies accountable using evidence on the impact of their actions, provide feedback to data producers, develop data literacy and help communities and individuals generate and use data.</p>
<p>NSOs are the central players of the Data Revolution. Their autonomy must be strengthened to maintain data quality. They must abandon expensive and cumbersome production processes, incorporate new data sources like big data that is human and machine-readable, compatible with geospatial information systems and available quickly enough to ensure that the data cycle matches the decision cycle. Collaborations with the private sector can boost technical and financial investments.</p>
<p><strong>Coordination</strong></p>
<p>Key stakeholders must create a “Global Consensus on Data”, to adopt principles concerning legal, technical, privacy, geospatial and statistical standards. Best practices related to public data such as the Open Government Partnership (OGP) and the G8 Open Data Charter are recommended foundations for such principles.</p>
<p>A UN-led “Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data” is proposed, to coordinate and broker key global public-private partnerships for data sharing <strong>[44]</strong>.</p>
<p>A “World Forum on Sustainable Development Data” and “Network of Data Innovation Networks” will be a converging point for the data ecosystem to share ideas and experiences for improvements, innovation and technology transfer.</p>
<h3 id="5-3">5.3. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD)</h3>
<p>The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an inter-governmental organization that seeks to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people globally. It has made the following proposals <strong>[45]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>Data is to be collected from National statistical agencies, national and international researchers and international organisations.</p>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>By leveraging the expertise of telecommunications companies and software developers, for instance, national statistical systems could potentially reduce costs and improve the availability of data to monitor development goals <strong>[46]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Coordination</strong></p>
<p>National Data Forums for Social Science Data must be created for the development of social science data for improved coordination between social scientists, data producers (national statistical agencies, government departments, large private sector businesses and sources undertaking academic direction), and data curators.</p>
<p>Social science research communities must contribute to national plans of action after a needs assessment <strong>[47]</strong>. Research funding agencies must collaborate at the international level for a common system for referencing datasets in research publications <strong>[48]</strong>.</p>
<h3 id="5-4">5.4. The Global Partnership for Sustainable Development of Data</h3>
<p>The partnership is a global network of governments, NGOs, and businesses working to strengthen the inclusivity, trust, and innovation in the way that data is used to address the world’s sustainable development efforts <strong>[49]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Analysis</strong></p>
<p>There must be a common framework for information processing. At minimum, a simple lexicon must tag each datum specifying:</p>
<ul><li><strong>What:</strong> i.e. the type of information contained in the data,</li>
<li><strong>Who:</strong> the observer or reporter,</li>
<li><strong>How:</strong> the channel through which the data was acquired,</li>
<li><strong>How much:</strong> whether the data is quantitative or qualitative, and</li>
<li><strong>Where and when:</strong> the spatio-temporal granularity of the data.</li></ul>
<p>Analysis of data involves filtering relevant information, summarising keywords and categorising into indicators. This intensive mining of socioeconomic data, known as “reality mining,” can be done by: (1) Continuous analysis of real time streaming data, (2) Digestion of semi-structured and unstructured data to determine perceptions, needs and wants. (3) Real-time correlation of streaming data with slowly accessible historical data repositories.</p>
<p>Use of big data for developmental goals can draw upon all three techniques to various degrees depending on availability of data and the specific needs.</p>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>NSOs have a pivotal part to play in the data revolution. Countries and organizations believe that big data cannot replace traditional official statistical data as it is based more on perception than facts. To quote Winston Churchill, "<em>Do not trust any statistics that you did not fake yourself</em>."</p>
<p>For instance, a study found that Google Flu Trends, to detect influenza epidemics, predicted nonspecific flu-like respiratory illnesses well but not actual flu. The mismatch was due to popular misconceptions on influenza symptoms. This has important policy implications. Doctors using Google Flu Trends may overstock on flu vaccines or be overly inclined to diagnose normal respiratory illnesses as influenza <strong>[50]</strong>.</p>
<p>However Big Data if understood correctly, can inform where further targeted investigation is necessary and give immediate responses to favourably change outcomes.</p>
<h3 id="5-5">5.5. The World Economic Forum (WEF)</h3>
<p>The WEF is an International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. It engages the foremost political, business and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas <strong>[51]</strong>. In the report titled <em>Big Data, Big Impact: New Possibilities for International Development</em>, it makes the following recommendations <strong>[52]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>Data production and development actors include individuals, public sector and the private sector. Each produce different kinds of data that have unique requirements. The private sector maintains vast troves of transactional data, much of which is "data exhaust," or data created as a by-product of other transactions. The public sector maintains enormous datasets in the form of census data, health indicators, and tax and expenditure information. The following figure highlights the different kinds of data that each sector collects and what incentives they have to share the data along with requirements to maintain such data.</p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/big-data-gov-framework_wef_01.png" alt="" />
<h6>World Economic Forum - Diagram on Data Commons.<br />
Source: World Economic Forum, <em><a href="http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TC_MFS_BigDataBigImpact_Briefing_2012.pdf">Big Data, Big Impact: New Possibilities for International Development</a></em>, 2012, p.4.<br /></h6>
<p>Business models must be created to provide the appropriate incentives for private-sector actors to share data. Such models already exist in the Internet environment. For instance companies in search and social networking profit from products they offer at no charge to end users because the usage data these products generate is valuable to other ecosystem actors. Similar models could be created in garnering Big Data for SDGs. The following flowchart illustrates how different sectors must work together to incentivise data collection and sharing.</p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/big-data-gov-framework_wef_02.png" alt="" />
<h6>World Economic Forum - Diagram on Global Coordination.<br />
Source: World Economic Forum, <em><a href="http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TC_MFS_BigDataBigImpact_Briefing_2012.pdf">Big Data, Big Impact: New Possibilities for International Development</a></em>, 2012, p.7.<br /></h6>
<h3 id="5-6">5.6. Dr. Julia Lane - A Quadruple Data Helix</h3>
<p>Dr. Julia Lane is a Professor in the Wagner School of Public Policy at New York University; and also a Provostial Fellow in Innovation Analytics and a Professor in the Center for Urban Science and Policy <strong>[53]</strong>. She has done extensive research on the uses of big data. In her paper titled "Big Data for Public Policy: A Quadruple Data Helix," she makes the following suggestions <strong>[54]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>In the future there will exist a model of a quadruple data helix for data collection which will have four strands — state and city agencies, universities, private data providers, and federal agencies.i</p>
<p>A new set of institution, city/university data facilities, must be established. These institutions should form the backbone of the quadruple helix, with direct connections to the private sector and to the federal statistical agencies.</p>
<p><strong>Analysis</strong></p>
<p>There is a need for graduate training for non-traditional students, who need to understand how to use data science tools as part of their regular employment. They must identify and capture the appropriate data, understand how data science models and tools can be applied, and determine how associated errors and limitations can be identified from a social science perspective.i</p>
<p>Universities can act as a trusted independent third party to process, store, analyze, and disseminate data. ii</p>
<p><strong>Management</strong></p>
<p>The new infrastructure must ensure that data from disparate sources are collected managed and used in a manner that is informed by end users. There are many technical challenges: disparate data sets must be ingested, their provenance determined, and metadata documented. Researchers must be able to query data sets to know what data are available and how they can be used. And if data sets are to be joined, they must be joined in a scientific manner, which means that workflows need to be traced and managed in such a way that the research can be replicated.</p>
<p><strong>Coordination</strong></p>
<p>The role of State and City agencies is to address immediate policy issues, rather than to build long-term data infrastructures as their mandate is to work with city data than the full spectrum of available data.</p>
<h3 id="5-7">5.7. Data-Pop Alliance</h3>
<p>Data-Pop Alliance is a global coalition on Big Data and development created by the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, MIT Media Lab, and Overseas Development Institute that brings together researchers, experts, practitioners, and activists to promote a people-centred big data revolution through collaborative research, capacity building, and community engagement <strong>[55]</strong>. It makes the following suggestions.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>The idea of <em>shared responsibility</em> between the public and private sector is a proposed operational principles to create a deliberative space. Mechanisms and legal frameworks must be devised for private companies to share their big data under formalized and stable arrangements instead of being compelled by ad hoc requests from researchers and policymakers.</p>
<p>The media too, could avoid publishing statistical data collected by unexplained methodologies by employing "statistical editors" and disseminate verified information.</p>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>For official statistics, engaging with Big Data is not a technical consideration but a political obligation. In a two tier system of official and non-official statistics, the public and investors tend to distrust official figures. For instance, the results of the 2010 census in the UK are being disputed on the basis of sewage data.</p>
<p>It is imperative for NSOs to retain, or regain, their primary role as the legitimate custodian of knowledge and creator of a deliberative public space to democratically drive human development <strong>[56]</strong>.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="6">6. Conclusion</h2>
<p>The Big data frameworks provide some useful insights on monitoring mechanisms though some questions remain unanswered in each model. Key actors that have been proposed include city and state agencies like NSOs, private companies, social scientists, private individuals and international research agencies. Data analysis can be through public-private collaborations, data philanthropy, and using indicators by thematic communities.</p>
<p><strong>Collection</strong></p>
<p>There appears consensus across models that collection must be effected through public private partnerships while providing incentives.</p>
<p><strong>Analysis</strong></p>
<p>While several methods of analysis have been proposed by the Global Partnership it is unclear on who will be conducting the analysis. The UNSDSN has suggested that it be conducted by academics and scientists with Julia Lane stating it must be through public private partnerships which appear more feasible and transparent.</p>
<p><strong>Role of NSOs</strong></p>
<p>All frameworks agree on the pivotal role of NSOs and acknowledge them as the key players and coordinators at the national level. They must be strengthened financially, technologically and politically. Most frameworks seek to empower national agencies which will coordinate collaborations with the private sector through incentives while protecting personal data.</p>
<p><strong>Coordination</strong></p>
<p>Several international fora have been proposed to enable coordination while there is consensus that the NSOs. A Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data, a Global Consensus on Data and a World Forum on Sustainable Development Data have been suggested. UN organizations appear to be suggesting more responsibility for those in the UN framework with UNSDSN giving an extensive list of lead agencies (UNDP, UN Women, Who etc) while the WEF emphasises on the private sector, Data Pop Alliance on NSOs, and Prof. Lane on State and City agencies.</p>
<p>On an international level countries can opt to join international organization that are being setup for the purpose. It remains to be seen whether all countries globally can achieve such a feat in a coordinated manner without infringing on data rights when unanswerable to any set international organization. The burden appears to fall on civil society and market forces within the private sector to regulate this process. For instance when a private sector company starts providing large un-anonymized data sets for government use, the privacy concerns of civil society that result in them opting for the company’s competitor’s more privacy friendly products will result in a regulation through market forces. However these forces may have disparate strengths in different contexts and countries depending on market practices and information asymmetry resulting in the lack of a uniform accountability mechanism.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="7">7. Endnotes</h2>
<p><strong>[1]</strong> Dan Ariely, Facebook, January 06, 2013, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dan.ariely/posts/904383595868">https://www.facebook.com/dan.ariely/posts/904383595868</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[2]</strong> United Nations Organizations, 'Sustainable Development Goals' (United Nations Sustainable Development, 26 September 2015), <a href="http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/">http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/</a>, accessed 6 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[3]</strong> Data Revolution Group, 'A World that Counts: Mobilising the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development' (November 2014), <a href="http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/A-World-That-Counts2.pdf">http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/A-World-That-Counts2.pdf</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[4]</strong> High level panel on the post-2015 development agenda , 'A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development'(Post2015hlp,0rg, July 2012), <a href="http://www.post2015hlp.org/">http://www.post2015hlp.org/</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[5]</strong> Gary King, 'Ensuring the Data-Rich Future of the Social Sciences' [2011] 3(2) Science, <a href="http://gking.harvard.edu/files/datarich.pdf">http://gking.harvard.edu/files/datarich.pdf</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[6]</strong> See <strong>[3]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[7]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[8]</strong> Michael Horrigan, 'Big Data: A Perspective from the BLS' (Amstatorg, 1 January 2013) <a href="http://magazine.amstat.org/blog/2013/01/01/sci-policy-jan2013/">http://magazine.amstat.org/blog/2013/01/01/sci-policy-jan2013/</a>, accessed 4 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[9]</strong> UN Global Pulse, 'Big Data for Development: Challenges & Opportunities' (6 May 2012) <a href="http://www.unglobalpulse.org/sites/default/files/BigDataforDevelopment-UNGlobalPulseJune2012.pdf">http://www.unglobalpulse.org/sites/default/files/BigDataforDevelopment-UNGlobalPulseJune2012.pdf</a>, accessed 5 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[10]</strong> Emmanuel Letouzé and Johannes Jütting, 'Official Statistics, Big Data and Human Development: Towards a New Conceptual and Operational Approach' (2014) 12(3), Data-Pop Alliance White papers Series, <a href="https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/events-documents/5161.pdf">https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/events-documents/5161.pdf</a>, accessed 4 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[11]</strong> See <strong>[9]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[12]</strong> See <strong>[10]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[13]</strong> See <strong>[9]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[14]</strong> UN Global Pulse, 'About: United Nations Global Pulse' (2016) <a href="http://www.unglobalpulse.org/about-new">http://www.unglobalpulse.org/about-new</a>, accessed 7 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[15]</strong> UN Stats, 'Global Working Group' (2014) <a href="http://unstats.un.org/unsd/bigdata/">http://unstats.un.org/unsd/bigdata/</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[16]</strong> New York City Press Release, ‘Mayor Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Kelly and Microsoft Unveil New, State-of-the-Art Law Enforcement Technology that Aggregates and Analyzes Existing Public Safety Data in Real Time to Provide a Comprehensive View of Potential Threats and Criminal Activity’ (New York City, 8 August 2012), <a href="http://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/291-12/mayor-bloomberg-police-commissioner-kelly-microsoft-new-state-of-the-art-law">http://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/291-12/mayor-bloomberg-police-commissioner-kelly-microsoft-new-state-of-the-art-law</a>, accessed 2 July 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[17]</strong> Francesco Mancini, 'New Technology and the Prevention of Violence and Conflict' (Reliefwebint, April 2013), <a href="http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/ipi-e-pub-nw-technology-conflict-prevention-advance.pdf">http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/ipi-e-pub-nw-technology-conflict-prevention-advance.pdf</a>, accessed 2 July 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[18]</strong> Arjuna Costa, Anamitra Deb, and Michael Kubzansky, 'Big Data, Small Credit: The Digital Revolution and Its Impact on Emerging Market Consumers,' (Omidyar, 3 March 2013) <a href="https://www.omidyar.com/sites/default/files/file_archive/insights/Big%20Data,%20Small%20Credit%20Report%202015/BDSC_Digital%20Final_RV.pdf">https://www.omidyar.com/sites/default/files/file_archive/insights/Big%20Data,%20Small%20Credit%20Report%202015/BDSC_Digital%20Final_RV.pdf</a>, accessed 2 July 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[19]</strong> United Nations Economic and Social Council, 'Report of the Global Working Group on Big Data for Official Statistics' (UN Stats, 3 March 2015), <a href="http://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/doc15/2015-4-BigData-E.pdf">http://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/doc15/2015-4-BigData-E.pdf</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[20]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[21]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[22]</strong> See <strong>[3]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[23]</strong> OECD, 'OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data' (23 September 1980), <a href="http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesontheprotectionofprivacyandtransborderflowsofpersonaldata.htm">http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesontheprotectionofprivacyandtransborderflowsofpersonaldata.htm</a>, accessed 29 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[24]</strong> Amir Efrati, ''Like' Button Follows Web Users' (WSJ, 18 May 2011) <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704281504576329441432995616">http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704281504576329441432995616</a>, accessed 23 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[25]</strong> See <strong>[15]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[26]</strong> Robert Kirkpatrick, 'Data Philanthropy: Public and Private Sector Data Sharing for Global Resilience' (UN Global Pulse, 16 September 2011), <a href="http://www.unglobalpulse.org/blog/data-philanthropy-public-private-sector-data-sharing-global-resilience">http://www.unglobalpulse.org/blog/data-philanthropy-public-private-sector-data-sharing-global-resilience</a>, accessed 4 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[27]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[28]</strong> Arvind Narayanan, 'No silver bullet: De-identification still doesn't work' (1 April 2016), <a href="http://randomwalker.info/publications/no-silver-bullet-de-identification.pdf">http://randomwalker.info/publications/no-silver-bullet-de-identification.pdf</a>, accessed 3 July 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[29]</strong> OECD Global Science Forum, 'New Data for Understanding the Human Condition: International Perspectives,' (February 2013) <a href="http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/new-data-for-understanding-the-human-condition.pdf">http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/new-data-for-understanding-the-human-condition.pdf</a>, accessed 2 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[30]</strong> S. Barocas, 'The Limits of Anonymity and Consent in the Big Data Age,' in <em>Privacy, Big Data, and the public good: Frameworks for Engagement</em> (Cambridge University Press, 2014).</p>
<p><strong>[31]</strong> A. Pentland, 'Institutional Controls: The New Deal on Data,' in <em>Privacy, Big Data, and the public good: Frameworks for Engagement</em> (Cambridge University Press, 2014).</p>
<p><strong>[32]</strong> See <strong>[3]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[33]</strong> UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 'About Us: Vision and Organization' (2012) <a href="http://unsdsn.org/about-us/vision-and-organization/">http://unsdsn.org/about-us/vision-and-organization/</a>, accessed 2 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[34]</strong> UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 'Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals: Launching a data revolution for the SDGs' (12 June 2015) <a href="http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/150612-FINAL-SDSN-Indicator-Report1.pdf">http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/150612-FINAL-SDSN-Indicator-Report1.pdf</a>, accessed 4 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[35]</strong> UNICEF, 'CME Info - Child Mortality Estimates' (2014) <a href="http://www.childmortality.org/">http://www.childmortality.org/</a>, accessed 1 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[36]</strong> See <strong>[10]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[37]</strong> UNESCO, 'Technical report by the Bureau of the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC) on the process of the development of an indicator framework for the goals and targets of the post-2015 development agenda' (6 March 2015) <a href="http://www.uis.unesco.org/ScienceTechnology/Documents/unsc-post-2015-draft-indicators.pdf">http://www.uis.unesco.org/ScienceTechnology/Documents/unsc-post-2015-draft-indicators.pdf</a>, accessed 3 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[38]</strong> UN, 'The Road to Dignity by 2030: Ending Poverty, Transforming All Lives and Protecting the Planet ' (4 December 2014) <a href="http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/reports/SG_Synthesis_Report_Road_to_Dignity_by_2030.pdf">http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/reports/SG_Synthesis_Report_Road_to_Dignity_by_2030.pdf</a>, accessed 7 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[39]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[40]</strong> UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 'Data for Development: An Action Plan to Finance the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development' (10 July 2015) <a href="http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Data-For-Development-An-Action-Plan-July-2015.pdf">http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Data-For-Development-An-Action-Plan-July-2015.pdf</a>, accessed 3 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[41]</strong> See <strong>[34]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[42]</strong> UN Data Revolution Group, 'About the Independent Expert Advisory Group' (6 November 2014) <a href="http://www.undatarevolution.org/about-ieag/">http://www.undatarevolution.org/about-ieag/</a>, accessed 4 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[43]</strong> See <strong>[3]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[44]</strong> The Partnership has already been established, and it is developing a further framework.</p>
<p><strong>[45]</strong> Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development), 'The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): About' (2016) <a href="http://www.oecd.org/about/">http://www.oecd.org/about/</a>, accessed 2 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[46]</strong> Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 'Strengthening National Statistical Systems to Monitor Global Goals' (2015) <a href="http://www.oecd.org/dac/POST-2015%20P21.pdf">http://www.oecd.org/dac/POST-2015%20P21.pdf</a>, accessed 1 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[47]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[48]</strong> OECD Global Science Forum, 'New Data for Understanding the Human Condition: International Perspectives' (February 2013) <a href="http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/new-data-for-understanding-the-human-condition.pdf">http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/new-data-for-understanding-the-human-condition.pdf</a>, accessed 2 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[49]</strong> The Global Partnership On Sustainable Development Data, 'Who We Are: The Data Ecosystem and the Global Partnership' (2016) <a href="http://www.data4sdgs.org/who-we-are/">http://www.data4sdgs.org/who-we-are/</a>, accessed 5 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[50]</strong> World Economic Forum, 'Big Data, Big Impact: New Possibilities for International Development' (22 January 2012) <a href="http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TC_MFS_BigDataBigImpact_Briefing_2012.pdf">http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TC_MFS_BigDataBigImpact_Briefing_2012.pdf</a>, accessed 8 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[51]</strong> World Economic Forum, 'Our Mission: The World Economic Forum' (12 January 2016) <a href="https://www.weforum.org/about/world-economic-forum/">https://www.weforum.org/about/world-economic-forum/</a>, accessed 7 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[52]</strong> See <strong>[50]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>[53]</strong> Julia Lane, Homepage, <a href="http://www.julialane.org/">http://www.julialane.org/</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[54]</strong> Julia Lane, 'Big Data for Public Policy: The Quadruple Helix' (2016) 8(1) <em>Journal of Policy Analysis and Management</em>, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pam.21921/abstract">DOI:10.1002/pam.21921</a>, accessed 1 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[55]</strong> Data-Pop Alliance, 'Data-Pop Alliance: Our Mission' (May 2014) <a href="http://datapopalliance.org/">http://datapopalliance.org/</a>, accessed 1 June 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[56]</strong> See <strong>[10]</strong>.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="8">8. Author Profile</h2>
<p>Meera Manoj is a law student at the Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar and has completed her first year. She is passionate about civil rights, feminism, economics in law and anything involving paneer. She aspires to travel the world and build up a vast library, with unparalleled sections on International Law and Archie comics.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-governance-frameworks-for-data-revolution-for-sustainable-development'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-governance-frameworks-for-data-revolution-for-sustainable-development</a>
</p>
No publisherMeera ManojDevelopmentBig DataData SystemsInternet GovernanceBig Data for DevelopmentSustainable Development Goals2016-07-05T13:13:32ZBlog EntryMonitoring Sustainable Development Goals in India: Availability and Openness of Data (Part II)
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02
<b>The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an internationally agreed upon set of developmental targets to be achieved by 2030. There are 17 SDGs with 169 targets, and each target is mapped to one or more indicators as a measure of evaluation. In this and the next blog post, Kiran AB is documenting the availability and openness of data sets in India that are relevant for monitoring the targets under the SDGs. This post offers the findings for the last 10 Goals. The first 7 has already been discussed in the earlier post.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><em>The first part of the post can be accessed <a href="http://cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-01/">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr />
<h3>Goal #08: <em>Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all</em></h3>
<p>There are fourteen indicators to monitor the goal 8 and the data is available for all the indicators mapped to their respective targets. For most of the indicators, the data availability is not what the indicator demands, but has to be derived from the available dataset.</p>
<p>The data can be accessed freely in the public domain for all the indicators. However, for the subparts in some of the indicators, the data is not accessible freely. There is a cross agency dependency over the data, to arrive at the required indicator.</p>
<p>Data is collected annually for most of the indicators, while the indicators, viz., Indicator 8.3.1.: Share of informal employment in non-agriculture employment by sex; Indicator 8.5.2: Unemployment rate by sex, age-group and persons with disabilities, which are measured by the Census or the planning commission the frequency of data collection becomes decennial or quinquennial. And the Indicator 8.8.2 : Number of ILO conventions ratified by type of convention, which lists the number of conventions the frequency cannot be determined as it's just a list updated whenever there is a ratification of any ILO conventions. Some of the available data are restricted to particular years and most of them are not till date.</p>
<p>Two indicators, i.e., Indicator 8.5.2 and Indicator 8.10.1: Number of commercial bank branches and ATMs per 100,000 adults, which are measured at the level of districts, whereas Indicator 8.7.1: Percentage and number of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child labour, per sex and age group; Indicator 8.8.1: Frequency rates of fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries by sex and migrant status, are measured at the state level. The remaining are measured only at the national level.</p>
<p>Most of the data are collected from the international organisations like ILO, UNEP, UNWTO, etc., from whose source the data are not updated regularly. There is also a need to disaggregate according to the indicator.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #09: <em>Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation</em></h3>
<p>When development is through industrialization, sustainable and inclusiveness should be the necessary conditions to attain it. Having said this, the data is available for all the indicators, i.e., twelve indicators, corresponding to the targets as defined for the goal 9. For most of the indicators, the data have to be derived for the required measure to monitor the goal.</p>
<p>From among these indicators, the data is collected annually for most of the indicators, while for the two indicators, Indicator 9.3.1: Percentage share of small scale industries in total industry value added; Indicator 9.3.2: Percentage of small scale industries with a loan or line of credit, the frequency of data collection is once in five years.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Excluding two indicators, i.e., Indicator 9.2.2: Manufacturing employment as a percentage of total employment; Indicator 9.1.1: Share of the rural population who live within 2km of an all season road, for which the data is available at the state level and district level respectively, for the remaining indicators the data is available only at the national level.</p>
<p>The data pertaining to eleven indicators are freely accessible in the public domain, however, for the Indicator 9.b.1: Percentage share of medium and high-tech (MHT) industry value added in total value added, the data is not freely accessible. Most of the freely available data are obtained from the international organisations, along with the official data from the government in India.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #10: <em>Reduce inequality within and among countries</em></h3>
<p>Bridging the gap between the global north-south divide through co-operation – social, economical, political, etc., would promote equality. There are twelve indicators for measuring this goal, of which the data is not available for one of the indicators and are available for the remaining indicators.</p>
<p>From the data available, for six of the indicators the data is accessible freely in the public domain, whereas for the five of the indicators – Indicator 10.2.1; Indicator 10.3.1; Indicator 10.4.1; Indicator 10.7.3; Indicator 10.a.1, the data is closed.</p>
<p>Most of the data available are of the national level and for the Indicator 10.7.3: Number of detected and non-detected victims of human trafficking per 100,000, the data includes from the states as well. However, since the goal refers to inequalities within the country as well, the granularity of the data should have been from the state/district level as well.</p>
<p>And, the frequency of data collected are annually for some of the indicators and for some the details cannot be determined or not valid. For most of the indicators the data has to be derived from the available dataset and disaggregated as needed. Also, for some indicators the data is partially available.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 10.7.1: Recruitment cost borne by employee as percentage of yearly income earned in country of destination</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #11: <em>Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable</em></h3>
<p>Housing and the type of settlements determines the human development and the progress of development of a nation. Therefore for monitoring the goal 11 is implicit to human development. There are thirteen indicators to monitor this goal and out of which the data is available for ten indicators and for the three indicators the data is not available.</p>
<p>For three of the indicators the available data is not freely accessible, while for the remaining ones the data is accessible. And for most of the indicators the data has to be derived as needed.</p>
<p>The data is collected annually for most of the indicators and quinquennially for the Indicator 11.5.1, and for some data the data pertains to particular year and there lacks a sequence of data availability.</p>
<p>For four of the indicators – Indicator 11.2.1; Indicator 11.3.1; Indicator 11.6.1; Indicator 11.a.1, the data is available at the state/city level along with national level. And for the remaining indicators the data is available at the national level alone. Also, some of the data are not up-to-date and refers to data more than 3 or years old.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 11.3.2: Percentage of cities with direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management, which operate regularly and democratically</li>
<li>Indicator 11.7.1: The average share of the built-up areas of cities that is open space in public use for all, disaggregated by age, sex, and persons with disabilities</li>
<li>Indicator 11.b.1: Percentage of cities implementing risk reduction and resilience strategies aligned with accepted international frameworks (such as the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action on Disaster Risk Reduction) that include vulnerable and marginalised groups in their design, implementation and monitoring</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #12: <em>Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns</em></h3>
<p>Production and consumption should go hand in hand, but over consumption or over production would only lead to destruction of the environment. Therefore goal 12 seeks to ensure a sustainability in both. The data is available for ten indicators out of twelve indicators, and for the two indicators the data is not available, so as to monitor the respective goals. Some of the data are partially available and using the available data the indicators can be derived.</p>
<p>Moreover, the data for six of the indicators which are available are freely accessible in the public domain whereas for the remaining four indicators – Indicator 12.4.1; Indicator 12.4.2; Indicator 12.5.1; Indicator 12.b.1, the data is not open.</p>
<p>While for most of the indicators say, Indicator 12.2.1; Indicator 12.3.1; Indicator 12.5.1; Indicator 12.a.1; Indicator 12.c.1, the data is collected annually, whereas for the others, the data which are available are for particular years or cannot be determined. Except for the Indicator 12.5.1, for which the data is available at the city level, the data for the remaining are of the national order. The data is collected from both the national institutions, ministries and also from the international organisations.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 12.1.1: Number of countries with SCP National Actions Plans or SCP mainstreamed as a priority or target into national policies.</li>
<li>Indicator 12.8.1: Percentage of educational institutions with formal and informal education curricula on sustainable development and lifestyle topics</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #13: <em>Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts</em></h3>
<p>The impact of climate change is severe, therefore taking an urgent action ensures could reduce the impact. The data is available for four of the indicators out of five, and for one of indicators the data is not available.</p>
<p>The data for three indicators are freely accessible in the public domain, whereas for the Indicator 13.3.1: Number of countries that have integrated mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula, the data is not open and also not specific to the indicator. The data for some of the indicators are partially available and have to be derived.</p>
<p>The frequency of the data is not uniform and cannot be determined, by the virtue of the indicator itself. For example, the occurrence of a disaster event is random. However, for some of the indicators the reporting is either annual or quadrennial.</p>
<p>The data availability is at the national level and in case of the Indicator 13.3.1., the data is available for two states – Orissa and Tamil Nadu. Data for almost all the indicators are obtained from international organizations and very less data availability from the national databases.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 13.2.1.: Number of countries that have formally communicated the establishment of integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk reduction development strategies</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #14: <em>Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>Oceans are the torchbearers for all the countries. Therefore everything related to oceans, seas and marine resources have an impact on the human life. There are ten indicators corresponding to the targets, of which the data is available for nine indicators and for one indicator the data is not available. The data for some of the indicators are not direct, but need to be derived, while for some indicators the data is partially available. To derive some indicators we need to rely on cross agency data.</p>
<p>For the Indicator 14.a.1: Budget allocation to research in the field of marine technology as a percentage of total budget to research, the data on budgetary allocation doesn't specify to marine technology.</p>
<p>The frequency of data collected for most of the indicators are not available or cannot be determined or not applicable, whereas for some the data is collected annually. And for most of the indicators the data is available at the national level and for the Indicator 14.5.1: Coverage of protected areas in relation to marine areas, the data is available for the states also.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 14.6.1: Dollar value of negative fishery subsidies against 2015 baseline</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #15: <em>Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>This goal on restoring, promoting ecosystem and stopping biodiversity loss, etc., has fifteen indicators mapped to twelve corresponding targets. Of which, the data is available for fourteen of the indicators and the data is not available for the one of the indicators. Data for some of the indicators exist partially and for some the data has to be derived to match the indicators. To arrive at the indicators, the data has to be derived from different datasets available.</p>
<p>Most of the data which are available are closed and only five are accessible in the public platform – Indicator 15.1.1 : Forest area as a percentage of total land area; Indicator 15.4.2: Mountain Green Cover Index; Indicator 15.8.1: Adoption of national legislation relevant to the prevention or control of invasive alien species; Indicator 15.9.1: Number of national development plans and processes integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services values; Indicator 15.a.1: Official development assistance and public expenditure on conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystems.</p>
<p>The frequency of data collected is not available or cannot be determined for majority of the indicators, while the data is annually collected for the ones which can be determined. Furthermore, the data is available at the national level for all the indicators, except the Indicator 15.b.1: Forestry official development assistance and forestry FDI, for which the data is available at the level of states as well.</p>
<p>The data available are collected by international organisations like OECD, FAO, Convention on Biological Diversity, etc., as well as by the national institutions and ministries like Planning Commission, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, etc.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 15.2.2: Net permanent forest loss</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #16: <em>Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>A society which is inclusive, peaceful, provides justice and accountable in all its forms would ensure sustainable development, therefore to promote the aforementioned parameters one has to monitor them through an established measure. There are twenty-one indicators for this goal mapped to the respective targets and out of which the data is not available for five indicators to monitor the goal. From the available dataset, the values need to be derived for some of the indicators and for some indicators the data is directly/partially available.</p>
<p>From among the data which are available, for nine indicators the data is not freely accessible in the public platform, while the remaining six data set are open to access. They are available both from national and international agencies and most of the data are not up to the date.</p>
<p>The data which are available are collected/reported annually. And, excluding four indicators. i.e.; Indicator 16.1.3, Indicator 16.3.1, Indicator 16.4.2, Indicator 16.b.1, the data is available at the state level, while for the remaining indicators the data is available only at the national level. Most of the indicators require data from past 12 months, but the available dataset does not cater the needs, as they are not updated regularly. Finally, the indicators seeks disaggregated data for monitoring the goal.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 16.1.4: Proportion of people that feel safe walking alone around the area they live</li>
<li>Indicator 16.2.3. Percentage of young women and men aged 18-24 years who experienced sexual violence by age 18</li>
<li>Indicator 16.6.2: Percentage of population satisfied with their last experience of public services</li>
<li>Indicator 16.7.2: Proportion of countries that address young people's multisectoral needs with their national development plans and poverty reduction strategies</li>
<li>Indicator 16.a.1: Percentage of victims who report physical and/or sexual crime to law enforcement agencies during past 12 months disaggregated by age, sex, region and population group</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #17: <em>Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>Moving towards achieving SDGs in the global scenario requires support – financial, technological, etc. This support can be strengthened the relationship between the developing and the developed countries. There are twenty-four indicators to monitor the goal 17, out of which the data is available for twenty-three of the indicators and for one of the indicators the data does not exist.</p>
<p>The data which are available are direct as per the indicators, whereas for most of the indicators the data need to be derived. Data is partially available for the Indicator 17.16.1: Indicator 7 from Global Partnership Monitoring Exercise: Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews.</p>
<p>From the data available for twenty-three indicators, fourteen of the data set are freely accessible and the nine are not open. Also, some of the data which are open are not up to date or the latest data is not open.</p>
<p>The data is collected annually for most of the indicators and for some the data is available for particular year. Also for some of the indicators like Indicator 17.5.1: Number of national & investment policy reforms adopted that incorporate sustainable development objectives or safeguards x country; Indicator 17.6.1: Access to patent information and use of the international intellectual property (IP) system; Indicator 17.18.2: Number of countries that have national statistical legislation that complies with the Fundamental Principles of Official statistics, the frequency cannot be determined or not valid.</p>
<p>Since this indicator speaks at the national level, the granularity of the data pertains to the nation. Most of the data are obtained from the international organisations say UN, World Bank, IMF, OECD, etc., and some are from the national institutions/ministries like Planning Commission, Finance Ministry, etc.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 17.17.1: Amount of US$ committed to public-private partnerships and civil society partnerships</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>Decision making depends on data, a data should be representative, with high quality and has to be timely collected, which ensures precise assessment of the decision being made. From the analysis it was found that, most of the data which are available are either not freely accessible, outdated and not precise to the need. Most of the SDG indicators are based on disaggregation. The disaggregation is a key to measure to the precision, especially incidences like poverty, food security, health, etc. Therefore, to monitor different parameters we need to identify the different levels prevailing in the parameter to ensure inclusivity.</p>
<p>Said above, the frequency of data collection is either annual, quinquennial and decennial. To enable real time evaluation, the data should be up-to-date. Moreover, for most of the indicators the data availability is at the national level or at the state level and sometimes at the district level. The granularity of data ensures geographic inclusiveness.</p>
<p>In a country like India for close monitoring of progress/development of any sort the data availability should be;</p>
<ul><li>at a granular level of district/block,</li>
<li>collected and updated regularly,</li>
<li>disaggregated by age, sex, and also by social group, and</li>
<li>the data should be open to be able to access in the public domain freely.</li></ul>
<p>Open data will be a crucial tool for governments to meet the transparency and efficiency challenges. For this reason, government data should be open – freely accessible, presented in a format that is comparable and reusable and, ideally, released in a timely manner.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Author</h3>
<p>Kiran A B, is a student of Master of Public Policy (MPP) at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru. Kiran has an undergraduate degree in electronics and communications engineering, and he has three years full-time work experience as a software engineer, working in different technological platforms. His research interest includes interdisciplinary linkages between policy, law and technology.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroDevelopmentOpen DataOpen Government DataData RevolutionOpennessSustainable Development Goals2016-04-12T04:14:27ZBlog EntryCIS Intervention on Future Work of the WIPO Advisory Committee on Enforcement
http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ace-7-future-work-cis-intervention
<b>The seventh session of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Advisory Committee on Enforcement (ACE) is being held in Geneva on November 30 and December 1, 2011. Pranesh Prakash intervened during the discussion of future work of the ACE with this comment.</b>
<p> </p>
<p>Thank you, Chair.</p>
<p>I just wanted to point out that some of the proposals on future work could be worded better to reflect their true meaning. For instance, one of the proposal calls for control of the problem of "parallel import". However, "parallel importation" is actually allowed by both the TRIPS Agreement and by various other instruments such as the Berne Convention? Indeed, calling “parallel import” a problem is like calling "exceptions and limitations" a problem. This is a view that has been firmly rejected here at WIPO, especially post the adoption of the WIPO Development Agenda. This, quite obviously, could not have been the intention of the proposal framers.</p>
<p>Further, the link between some of the proposals and the Development Agenda could be made clearer. It has been established that the Development Agenda is not just something for the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP) to consider, but for all committees to make an integral part of their work.</p>
<p>I would also like to underscore the importance of evidence-based policy-making.</p>
<p>Lastly, I would like to mention that a report has already been commissioned by WIPO on intermediary liability, which was written by Prof. Lilian Edwards and was released in a side-event during SCCR 22, in June 2011.</p>
<p>If the ACE is going ahead with a study or an event, I would suggest that the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Opinion, who in his report to the UN Human Rights Council dealt in some depth with intermediary liability, be involved or invited.</p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ace-7-future-work-cis-intervention'>http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ace-7-future-work-cis-intervention</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshDevelopmentAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightIntellectual Property RightsWIPO2011-12-01T15:30:38ZBlog EntryLocating Internets: Histories of the Internet(s) in India — Research Training and Curriculum Workshop: Call for Participation
http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop
<b>Deadline for submission: 26th July 2011-06-08;
When: 19th - 22nd August, 2011;
Where: Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT) University, Ahmedabad;
Organised by: Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore and CEPT University, Ahmedabad.
Please Note: Travel support is only available for domestic travel within India.</b>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is an innovative, multi-disciplinary, workshop that engages with some of the most crucial debates around Internet and Society within academic scholarship, discourse and practice in India. It explores Where, When, How and What has changed with the emergence of Internet and Digital Technologies in the country. The Internet is not a singular monolithic entity but is articulated in various forms – sometimes materially, through accessing the web; at others, through our experiences; and yet others through imaginations of policy and law. Internets have become a part of our everyday practice, from museums and archives, to school and university programmes, living rooms and public spaces, relationships and our bodily lived realities. It becomes necessary to reconfigure our existing concepts, frameworks and ideas to make sense of the rapidly digitising world around us. The Internet is no longer contained in niche disciplines or specialised everyday practices. LOCATING INTERNETS invites scholars, teachers, researchers, advanced research students and educationalists from any discipline to learn and discuss how to ask new questions and design innovative curricula in their discipline by introducing concepts and ideas from path-breaking research in India.</p>
<p>Comprised of training, public lectures, open discussion spaces, and hands-on curriculum building exercises, this workshop will introduce the participants to contemporary debates, help them articulate concerns and problems from their own research and practice, and build knowledge clusters to develop innovative and open curricula which can be implemented in interdisciplinary undergraduate spaces in the country. It showcases the research outputs produced by the Centre for Internet and Society’s Researchers @ Work Programme, and brings together nine researchers to talk about alternative histories, processes, and bodies of the Internets, and how they can be integrated into mainstream pedagogic practices and teaching environments.</p>
<h3>Knowledge Clusters for the Workshop</h3>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is designed innovatively to accommodate for various intellectual and practice based needs of the participants. While the aim is to introduce the participants to a wide interdisciplinary range of scholarship, we also hope to address particular disciplinary and scholarly concerns of the participants. The workshop is further divided into three knowledge clusters which help the participants to focus their energies and ideas in the course of the four days.</p>
<ul><li><strong>Bridging the Gap</strong>: This workshop seeks to break away from the utopian public discourse of the Internets as a-historical and completely dis-attached from existing technology ecologies in the country. This knowledge cluster intends to produce frameworks that help us contextualize the contemporary internet policy, discourse and practice within larger geo-political and socio-historical flows and continuities in Modern India. The first cluster chartsdifferent pre-histories of the Internets, mapping the continuities and ruptures through philosophy of techno-science, archiving practices, and electronifcation of governments,to develop new technology-society perspectives.</li><li><strong>Paradigms of Practice</strong>:One of the biggest concerns about Internet studies in India and other similar developed contexts is the object oriented approach that looks largely at specific usages, access, infrastructure, etc. However, it is necessary to understand that the Internet is not merely a tool or a gadget. The growth of Internets produces systemic changes at the level of process and thought. The technologies often get appropriated for governance both by the state and the civil society, producing new processes and dissonances which need to be charted. The second cluster looks at certain contemporary processes that the digital and Internet technologies change drastically in order to recalibrate the relationship between the state, the market and the citizen.</li><li><strong>Feet on the Ground</strong>: The third cluster looks at contemporary practices of the Internet to understand the recent histories of movements, activism and cultural practices online. It offers an innovative way of understanding the physical objects and bodies that undergo dramatic transitions as digital technologies become pervasive, persuasive and ubiquitous. It draws upon historical discourse, everyday practices and cultural performances to form new ways of formulating and articulating the shapes and forms of social and cultural structures.</li></ul>
<h3>Workshop Outcomes</h3>
<p>The participants are expected to engage with issue of Internet and it various systemic processes through their own disciplinary interests. Apart from lectures and orientation sessions, the participants will actively work on their own project ideas during the period in groups and will be guided by experts. The final outcome of the workshops would be curriculum for undergraduate and graduate teaching space of various disciplines in the country.</p>
<h3>Participation Guidelines</h3>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is now accepting submissions from interested participants in the following format:</p>
<ol><li>Name:</li><li>Institutional affiliation and title:</li><li>Address:</li><li>Email address:</li><li>Phone number:</li><li>A brief resume of work experience (max. 350 words)</li><li>Statement of interest (max. 350 words)</li><li>Key concerns you want to address in the Internet and Society field (max. 350 words)</li><li>Identification with one Knowledge-cluster of the workshop and a proposal for integrating it in your research/teaching practice (max. 500 words)</li><li>Current interface with technologies in your pedagogic practices (max. 350 words)</li><li>Additional information or relevant hyperlinks you might want to add (Max. 10 lines)<br /></li></ol>
<pre>Notes:</pre>
<ul><li>Submissions will be accepted only from participants in India, as attachments in .doc, .docx or .odt formats at <a class="external-link" href="mailto:locatinginternets@cis-india.org">locatingInternets@cis-india.org</a></li><li>Submissions made beyond 26th July 2011 may not be considered for participation. <br /></li><li>Submissions will be scrutinized by the organisers and selected participants will be informed by the 30th July 2011, about their participation.</li><li>Selected participants will be required to make their own travel arrangements to the workshop. A 2nd A.C. train return fare will be reimbursed to the participants. Shared accommodation and selected meals will be provided at the workshop.</li><li>A limited number of air-fare reimbursements will be available to participants in extraordinary circumstances. All travel support is only available for domestic travel in the country.<br /></li></ul>
<p><strong>Chairs</strong>: Nishant Shah, Director-Research, Centre for Internet and Society Bangalore;</p>
<p>Pratyush Shankar, Associate Professor & Head of Undergraduate Program, Faculty of Architecture, CEPT University</p>
<p><strong>Supported by</strong>: Kusuma Foundation, Hyderabad</p>
<p><strong>Experts</strong>:Anja Kovacs, Arun Menon, Asha Achuthan, Ashish Rajadhykasha, Aparna Balachandran, Namita Malhotra, Nithin Manayath, Nithya Vasudevan, Pratyush Shankar, Rochelle Pinto and Zainab Bawa</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop'>http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaDevelopmentGamingDigital ActivismDigital GovernanceResearchCISRAWFeaturedCyberculturesarchivesNew PedagogiesWorkshopIT Cities2011-07-21T06:00:39ZBlog EntryBeyond Access as Inclusion
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/beyond-access-as-inclusion
<b>On 13 September, the day before the fifth Internet Governance Forum opens, CIS is coorganising in Vilnius a meeting on Internet governance and human rights. One of the main aims of this meeting is to call attention to the crucial, yet in Internet governance often neglected, indivisibility of rights. In this blog post, Anja Kovacs uses this lens to illustrate how it can broaden as well reinvigorate our understanding of what remains one of the most pressing issues in Internet governance in developing countries to this day: that of access to the Internet.</b>
<p align="JUSTIFY">One of the most attractive characteristics of the
Internet – and perhaps also one of the most debated ones – is its
empowering, democratising potential. In expositions in favour of
access to the Internet for all, this potential certainly often plays
a central role: as the Internet can help us to make our societies
more open, more inclusive, and more democratic, everybody should be
able to reap the fruits of this technology, it is argued. In other
words, in debates on access to the Internet, most of us take as our
<em>starting point</em> the desirability of such access, for the above
reasons. But how justified is such a stance? Is an Internet-induced
democratic transformation of our societies what is actually happening
on the ground?</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">I would like to move away, in this blog post, from
the more traditional approaches to the issue of access, where debates
mostly veer towards issues of infrastructure (spectrum, backbones,
last mile connectivity, …) or, under the banner of “diversity”,
towards the needs of specific, disadvantaged communities (especially
linguistic minorities and the disabled). To remind us more sharply of
the issues at stake and of the wide range of human rights that need
our active attention to make our dreams a reality, I would like to
take a step back and to ask two fundamental questions regarding
access: why might access be important? And what do we actually have
access to?</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Let me start, then, by exploring the first question:
why, actually, is Internet access important? In his canonical work on
the information age, and especially in the first volume on the rise
of the network society, Manuel Castells (2000) has perhaps provided
the most elaborate and erudite description of the ways in which new
technologies are restructuring our societies and our lives. We are
all all too familiar with the many and deep-seated ways in which the
Internet changes the manner in which we learn, play, court, pay, do
business, maintain relationships, dream, campaign. And yet, the exact
nature of the divide created by the unequal distribution of technical
infrastructure and access, despite being so very real, receives
relatively little attention: this divide is not simply one of
opportunities, it is crucially one of power. If in traditional
Marxist analysis the problem was that the oppressed did not have
access to the means of production, today, one could well argue, the
problem is that they do not have access to the means of communication
and information.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Indeed, the Internet is not something that is simply
happening to us: there are people who are responsible for these new
evolutions. And so it becomes important to ask: who is shaping the
Internet? Who is creating this new world? Let us, by way of example,
consider some figures relating to Internet use in India. So often
hailed as the emerging IT superpower of the world, there are, by the
end of 2009, according to official government figures, in this
country of 1 billion 250 million people slightly more than 15 million
Internet connections. Of these, only slightly more than half, or
almost 8 million, are broadband connections – the rest are still
dial-up ones (TRAI 2010). The number of Internet users is of course
higher – one survey estimates that there are between 52 million and
71 million Internet users in urban areas, where the bulk of users is
still located (IAMAI 2010). But while this is a considerable number,
it remains a fraction of the population in a country so big. What
these figures put in stark relief, then, is that the poor and
marginalised are not so much excluded from the information society
(in fact, many have to bear the consequences of new evolutions made
possible by it in rather excruciating fashion), but rather, that they
are fundamentally excluded from shaping the critical ways in which
our societies are being transformed.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">To have at least the possibility to access the
Internet is, then, of central significance in this context for the
possibility of participation it signals in the restructuring of our
societies at the community, national and global level, and this in
two ways: in the creation of visions of where our societies should be
going, and in the actual shaping of the architecture of our societies
in the information age.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">If we agree that access attains great significance
in this sense, then a second question poses itself, and that is: in
practice, what exactly are we getting access to? This query should be
of concern to all of us. With the increasing corporatisation of the
Internet and the seemingly growing urges of governments on all
continents to survey and control their citizens, new challenges are
thrown up of how to nurture the growth of open, inclusive, democratic
societies, that all of us are required to take an interest in.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Yet it is in the case of poor and marginalised
people that the challenges are most pronounced. Efforts to
include them in the information society are disproportionately
legitimised on the basis of the contribution these can make to
improving their livelihoods. Initiatives, often using mobile
technology, that allow farmers to get immediate information about the
market prices of the produce they are intending to sell, are perhaps
the most well-known and oft-cited examples in this category. Other
efforts aim to improve the information flow from the government to
citizens: India has set up an ambitious network of Common Service
Centres, for example, that aim to greatly facilitate the access of
citizens to particular government services, such as obtaining birth
or caste certificates – and going by first indications, this also
seems to be succeeding in practice. Only rarely, however, do
initiatives to “include” the poor in the information society
address them as holistic beings who do not only have economic lives,
but political, emotional, creative and intellectual existences as
well. This is not to say that economic issues are not of
importance. But by highlighting only this aspect of poor people's
lives, we promote a highly impoverished understanding of their
existences.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">The focus on a limited aspect of the poor's identity
- important as that aspect may be - has a function, however: it makes
it possible to hide from view the extremely restrictive terms on
which poor people are currently being integrated into the information
society. Even initiatives such as the Common Service Centres are in
fact based on a public-private-partnership model that explicitly aims
to “align [..] social and commercial goals” (DIT 2006: 1), and in
effect subordinates government service design to the requirements of
the CSC business model (Singh 2008). The point is not simply that we
need strong privacy and data protection policies in such a context –
although we clearly do. There is a larger issue here, which is that
efforts to include the poor in the information society, in the
present circumstances, really seem to simply integrate them more
closely into a capitalist system over which they have little control,
or to submit them to ever greater levels of government and corporate
surveillance. Their own capacity to give shape to the system in which
they are “included”, despite the oft-heralded capacities of the
Internet to allow greater democratic participation and to turn
everybody into a producer and distributor, as well as a consumer,
remains extremely limited.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Such tendencies have not gone unnoticed. For
example, unlike in many other parts of the world, social movements in
India fighting against dams, special economic zones or mining
operations in forest areas - all initiatives that lead to large-scale
displacement – have not embraced technology as enthusiastically as
one might have expected. There are various reasons for this. Within
Indian nationalism, there have always been strands deeply critical of
technology, with Gandhi perhaps their most illustrious proponent. But
for many activists, technology often also already comes with an
ideological baggage: an application such as Twitter, for example, in
so many of its aspects is clearly manufactured by others, for others,
drawing on value sets that activists often in many ways are reluctant
to embrace. And such connotations only gain greater validity because
of the intimate connections that exist in India between the IT boom
and neoliberalism: technology has great responsibility for many of
the trends and practices these activists are fighting against. While
the Internet might have made possible many new publics, most
movements do not – as movements – recognise these publics as
their own (Kovacs, forthcoming).</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">To some extent, these are of course questions of the
extent of access that people are granted. But they also raise the
important issue of the value structure of the Internet. Efforts at
inclusion always take for granted a standard that is already set. But
what if the needs and desires of the many billions that still need to
be included are not served by the Internet <em>as it exists</em>? What
if, for it to really work for them, they need to be able to make the
Internet a different place than the one we know today? While it is
obvious that different people will give different answers in
different parts of the world, such debates are complicated
tremendously by the fact that it is no longer sufficient to reach a
national consensus on the issues under discussion, as was the case in
earlier eras. The global nature of the Internet's infrastructure
requires that the possibility of differing opinions, too, needs to be
facilitated at the global level. What are the consequences of this
for the development of democracy?</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">For access to the Internet to be substantively
meaningful from a human rights perspective in the information age, it
is crucial, then, that at a minimum, the openness of the Internet is
ensured at all levels. Of course, openness can be considered a value
in itself. But perhaps more importantly, at the moment, it is the
only way in which the possibility of a variety of answers to the
pressing question of what shape our societies should take in the
information age can emerge. Open standards and the portability of
data, for example, are crucial if societies are to continue to decide
on the role corporations should play in their public life, rather
than having corporations <em>de facto</em> rule the roost. Similarly,
under no circumstances should anyone be cut off from the Internet, if
people are to participate in the public life of the societies of
which they are members. And these are not just concerns for
developing countries: if recent incidents from France to Australia
are anything to go by, new possibilities facilitated by the Internet
have, at least at the level of governments, formed the impetus for a
clear shift to the right of the political spectrum in many developed
countries. In the developed world, too, the questions of access and
what it allows for are thus issues that should concern all. In the
information age, human rights will only be respected if such respect
is already inscribed in the very architecture of its central
infrastructure itself.<br /><br /></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY"><strong>List of References</strong></p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Castells, Manuel (2000). <em>The Rise of the Network
Society, 2<sup>nd</sup> edition</em>. Oxford: Blackwell.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Department of Information Technology (DIT) (2006).
<em>Guidelines for the Implementation of Common Services Centers
(CSCs) Scheme in States</em>. New Delhi: Department of Information
Technology, Government of India.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI)
(2010). <em>I-Cube 2009-2010: Internet in India</em>. Mumbai: Internet
and Mobile Association of India.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Kovacs, Anja (forthcoming). <em>Inquilab 2.0?
Reflections on Online Activism in India</em> (working title).
Bangalore: Centre for Internet and Society.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Singh, Parminder Jeet (2008). <em>Recommendations for a
Meaningful and Successful e-Governance in India</em>. IT for Change Policy
Brief, IT for Change, Bangalore.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY">Telecom Regulatory Auhority of India (TRAI) (2010).
<em>The Indian Telecom Services Performance Indicators,
October-December 2009</em>. New Delhi: Telecom Regulatory Auhority of
India.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY"> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/beyond-access-as-inclusion'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/beyond-access-as-inclusion</a>
</p>
No publisheranjaDevelopmentDigital AccessInternet Governancehuman rights2011-08-02T07:29:03ZBlog EntryA Guide to Key IPR Provisions of the Proposed India-European Union Free Trade Agreement
http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/a-guide-to-the-proposed-india-european-union-free-trade-agreement
<b>The Centre for Internet and Society presents a guide for policymakers and other stakeholders to the latest draft of the India-European Union Free Trade Agreement, which likely will be concluded by the end of the year and may hold serious ramifications for Indian businesses and consumers. </b>
<div class="visualClear">In its ongoing negotiation for a FTA with the EU, a process that began in 2007 and is expected to end sometime this year, India has won several signicant IP-related concessions. But there remain several IP issues critical to the maintenance of its developing economy, including its robust entrepreneurial environment, that India should contest further before ratifying the treaty. This guide covers the FTA's IP provisions that are within the scope of CIS' policy agenda and on which India has negotiated favorable language, as well as those provisions that it should re-negotiate or oppose.</div>
<div class="visualClear"> </div>
<div class="visualClear">Download the guide <a title="A Guide to the Proposed India-European Union FTA" class="internal-link" href="http://www.cis-india.org/a2k/publications/CIS%20Open%20Data%20Case%20Studies%20Proposal.pdf">here</a>, and please feel free to comment below.</div>
<div class="visualClear"> </div>
<div class="visualClear">You may also download a <a title="India-EU FTA TRIPS Comparison Chart" class="internal-link" href="http://www.cis-india.org/advocacy/ipr/upload/India-EU_FTA_Chart.odt">chart</a> comparing the language proposed by India and the EU respectively with that included in the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).</div>
<div class="visualClear"> </div>
<div class="visualClear">Following is a summary of CIS' findings:</div>
<div class="visualClear"> </div>
<div class="visualClear">
<div class="visualClear">
<ul><li>India has become a de facto leader of developing countries at the WTO, and an India-EU FTA seems likely to provide a model for FTAs between developed and developing states well into the future.</li><li>The EU has proposed articles on reproduction, communication, and broadcasting rights which could seriously undermine India's authority to regulate the use of works under copyright as currently provided for in the Berne Convention, as well as narrowing exceptions and limitations to rights under copyright.</li><li>The EU asserts that copyright includes "copyright in computer programs and in databases," without indicating whether such copyright exceeds that provided for in the Berne Convention. Moreover, by asserting that copyright "includes copyright in computer programs and in databases," the EU has left open the door for the extension of copyright to non-original databases.</li><li>India should explicitly obligate the EU to promote and encourage technology transfer -- an obligation compatible with and derived from TRIPS -- as well as propose a clear definition of technology transfer.</li><li>The EU has demanded India's accession to the WIPO Internet Treaties, the merits of which are currently under debate as India moves towards amending its Copyright Act, as well as several other international treaties that India either does not explicitly enforce or to which it is not a contracting party.</li><li>In general, the EU's provisions would extend terms of protection for material under copyright, within certain constraints, further endangering India's consumer-friendly copyright regime.</li><li>An agreement to establish arrangements between national organizations charged with collecting and distributing royalty payments may obligate such organizations in India collect royalty payments for EU rights holders on the same basis as they do for Indian rights holders, and vice versa in the EU, but more heavily burden India.</li><li>The EU has proposed a series of radical provisions on the enforcement of IPRs that are tailored almost exclusively to serve the interests of rights holders, at the expense of providing safety mechanisms for those accused of infringing or enabling infringers. </li><li>The EU has proposed, under cover of protecting intermediate service providers from liability for infringement by their users, to increase and/or place the burden on such providers of policing user activity.</li></ul>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/a-guide-to-the-proposed-india-european-union-free-trade-agreement'>http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/a-guide-to-the-proposed-india-european-union-free-trade-agreement</a>
</p>
No publishergloverDevelopmentConsumer RightsCopyrightAccess to KnowledgeDiscussionEconomicsAnalysisTechnological Protection MeasuresIntermediary LiabilityinnovationIntellectual Property RightsPatentsPublications2011-08-30T13:06:03ZBlog EntryThe 2010 Special 301 Report Is More of the Same, Slightly Less Shrill
http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/2010-special-301
<b>Pranesh Prakash examines the numerous flaws in the Special 301 from the Indian perspective, to come to the conclusion that the Indian government should openly refuse to acknowledge such a flawed report. He notes that the Consumers International survey, to which CIS contributed the India report, serves as an effective counter to the Special 301 report.</b>
<h1>Special 301 Report: Unbalanced Hypocrisy</h1>
<p>The United States Trade Representative has put yet another edition of the Special 301 report which details the copyright law and policy wrongdoings of the US's trading partners. Jeremy Malcolm of Consumers International notes that the report this year claims to be "well-balanced assessment of intellectual property protection and enforcement ... taking into account diverse factors", but:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[I]n fact, the report largely continues to be very one-sided. As in previous editions, it lambasts developing countries for failing to meet unrealistically stringent standards of IP protection that exceed their obligations under international law.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>More the report changes, <a href="http://cis-india.org/advocacy/ipr/blog/consumers-international-ip-watch-list-2009">the more it stays the same</a>. <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4684/195/">Despite having wider consultations</a> than just the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA, consisting of US-based IP-maximalist lobbyists like the Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of America, National Music Publishers Association, Association of American Publishers, and Business Software Alliance) and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA, consisting of US-based pharma multinationals), things haven't really changed much in terms of the shoddiness of the Special 301 report.</p>
<h1>India and the 2010 Special 301 Report</h1>
<p>The Special 301 report for 2010 contains the following assessment of India:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>India will remain on the Priority Watch List in 2010. India continues to make gradual progress on efforts to improve its legislative, administrative, and enforcement infrastructure for IPR. India has made incremental improvements on enforcement, and its IP offices continued to pursue promising modernization efforts. Among other steps, the United States is encouraged by the Indian government’s consideration of possible trademark law amendments that would facilitate India’s accession to the Madrid Protocol. The United States encourages the continuation of efforts to reduce patent application backlogs and streamline patent opposition proceedings. Some industries report improved engagement and commitment from enforcement officials on key enforcement challenges such as optical disc and book piracy. However, concerns remain over India’s inadequate legal framework and ineffective enforcement. Piracy and counterfeiting, including the counterfeiting of medicines, remains widespread and India’s enforcement regime remains ineffective at addressing this problem. Amendments are needed to bring India’s copyright law in line with international standards, including by implementing the provisions of the WIPO Internet Treaties. Additionally, a law designed to address the unauthorized manufacture and distribution of optical discs remains in draft form and should be enacted in the near term. The United States continues to urge India to improve its IPR regime by providing stronger protection for patents. One concern in this regard is a provision in India’s Patent Law that prohibits patents on certain chemical forms absent a showing of increased efficacy. While the full import of this provision remains unclear, it appears to limit the patentability of potentially beneficial innovations, such as temperature-stable forms of a drug or new means of drug delivery. The United States also encourages India to provide protection against unfair commercial use, as well as unauthorized disclosure, of undisclosed test or other data generated to obtain marketing approval for pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical products. The United States encourages India to improve its criminal enforcement regime by providing for expeditious judicial disposition of IPR infringement cases as well as deterrent sentences, and to change the perception that IPR offenses are low priority crimes. The United States urges India to strengthen its IPR regime and will continue to work with India on these issues in the coming year. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This short dismissal of the Indian IPR regime, and subsequent classification of India as a "Priority Watch List" country reveals the great many problems with the Special 301.</p>
<h2>On Copyrights</h2>
<ol>
<li>
<p>The report notes that there are "concerns over India's inadequate legal framework and ineffective enforcement". However, nowhere does it bother to point out precisely <em>how</em> India's legal framework is inadequate, and how this is negatively affecting authors and creators, consumers, or even the industry groups (MPAA, RIAA, BSA, etc.) that give input to the USTR via the IPAA. Nor does it acknowledge the well-publicised fact that the statistics put out by these bodies have time and again <a href="http://www.cis-india.org/a2k/blog/fallacies-lies-and-video-pirates">proven to be wrong</a>:</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Apart from this bald allegation which has not backing, there is a bald statement about India needing to bring its copyright law "in line with international standards" including "the WIPO Internet Treaties". The WIPO Internet Treaties given that more than half the countries of the world are not signatories to either of the WIPO Internet Treaties (namely the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty), calling them 'international standards' is suspect. That apart, both those treaties are TRIPS-plus treaties (requiring protections greater than the already-high standards of the TRIPS Agreement). India has not signed either of them. It should not be obligated to do so. Indeed, Ruth Okediji, a noted copyright scholar, <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1433848">states</a>:</p>
</li>
</ol>
<blockquote>
<p>Consistent with their predecessors, the WIPO Internet Treaties marginalize collaborative forms of creative engagement with which citizens in the global South have long identified and continue in the tradition of assuming that copyright’s most enduring cannons are culturally neutral. [...] The Treaties do not provide a meaningful basis for a harmonized approach to encourage new creative forms in much the same way the Berne Convention fell short of embracing diversity in patterns and modes of authorial expression.</p>
</blockquote>
<ol>
<li>
<p>Some of the of the 'problems' noted in the report are actually seen as being beneficial by many researchers and scholars such as Lawrence Liang, Achal Prabhala, Perihan Abou Zeid <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/iipenforcement/bibliography">and others</a>, who argue that <a href="http://www.altlawforum.org/intellectual-property/publications/articles-on-the-social-life-of-media-piracy/reconsidering-the-pirate-nation">lax enforcement has enabled access to knowledge and promotion of innovation</a>. In a panel on 'Access to Knowledge' at the Internet Governance Forum, <a href="http://a2knetwork.org/access-knowledge-internet-governance-forum">Lea Shaver, Jeremy Malcolm and others</a> who have been involved in that Access to Knowledge movement noted that lack of strict enforcement played a positive role in many developing countries. However, they also noted, with a fair bit of trepidation, that this was sought to be changed at the international level through treaties such as the Anti-Counterfeiting Treaty Agreement (ACTA).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The scope of an optical disc law are quite different from copyright law. The report condemns "unauthorized manufacture and distribution of optical discs", however it does not make it clear that what it is talking about is not just unlicensed copying of films (which is already prohibited under the Copyright Act) but the manufacture and distribution of blank CDs and DVDs as well. The need for such a law is assumed, but never demonstrated. It is onerous for CD and DVD manufacturers (such as the Indian company Moserbaer), and is an overbearing means of attacking piracy.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The report calls for "improve[ment] [of India's] criminal enforcement regime" and for "deterrent" sentences and expeditious judicial disposition of IPR infringement cases. While we agree with the last suggestion, the first two are most unacceptable. Increased criminal enforcement of a what is essentially a private monopoly right is undesirable. Copyright infringment on non-commercial scales should not be criminal offences at all. What would deter people from infringing copyright laws are not "deterrent sentences" but more convenient and affordable access to the copyright work being infringed.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<h2>On Patents</h2>
<p>Thankfully, this year the Special 301 report does not criticise the Indian Patent Act for providing for post-grant opposition to patent filings, as it has in previous years. However, it still criticises section 3(d) of the Patent Act which ensures that 'evergreening' of drug patents is not allowed by requiring for new forms of known substances to be patented only if "the enhancement of the known efficacy of [the known] substance" is shown. Thus, the US wishes India to change its domestic law to enable large pharma companies to patent new forms of known substances that aren't even better ("enhancement of the known efficacy"). For instance, "new means of drug delivery" will not, contrary to the assertions of the Special 301 report and the worries of PhRMA, be deemed unpatentable.</p>
<p>The United States has been going through much turmoil over its patent system. Reform of the patent system is currently underway in the US through administrative means, judicial means, as well as legislative means. One of the main reasons for this crumbling of the patent system has been the low bar for patentability (most notably the 'obviousness' test) in the United States and the subsequent over-patenting. An <a href="http://supreme.justia.com/us/447/303/case.html">American judgment</a> even noted that "anything under the sun that is made by man" is patentable subject matter. It is well-nigh impossible to take American concerns regarding our high patent standards seriously, given this context.</p>
<h2>Miscellanea</h2>
<p>The harms of counterfeit medicine, as <a href="http://www.cis-india.org/a2k/blog/fallacies-lies-and-video-pirates">we have noted earlier</a>, are separate issues that are best dealt under health safety regulations and consumer laws, rather than trademark law.</p>
<p>Data exclusivity has been noted to be harmful to the progress of generics, and seeks to extend proprietary rights over government-mandated test data. It is [clear from the TRIPS Agreement][de-trips] that data exclusivity is not mandatory. There are clear rationale against it, and the Indian pharmaceutical industry [is dead-set against it][de-india]. Still, the United States Trade Representative persists in acting as a corporate shill, calling on countries such as India to implement such detrimental laws.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Michael Geist, professor at University of Ottowa <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4997/125">astutely notes</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Looking beyond just Canada, the list [of countries condemned by the Special 301 report] is so large, that it is rendered meaningless. According to the report, approximately 4.3 billion people live in countries without effective intellectual property protection. Since the report does not include any African countries outside of North Africa, the U.S. is effectively saying that only a small percentage of the world meet its standard for IP protection. Canada is not outlier, it's in good company with the fastest growing economies in the world (the BRIC countries are there) and European countries like Norway, Italy, and Spain.
In other words, the embarrassment is not Canadian law. Rather, the embarrassment falls on the U.S. for promoting this bullying exercise and on the Canadian copyright lobby groups who seemingly welcome the chance to criticize their own country. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>His comments apply equally well for India as well.</p>
<h1>IIPA's Recommendation for the Special 301 Report</h1>
<p>Thankfully, this year <a href="http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301INDIA.pdf">IIPA's recommendations</a> have not been directly copied into the Special 301 report. (They couldn't be incorporated, as seen below.) For instance, the IIPA report notes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The industry is also concerned about moves by the government to consider mandating the use of open source software and software of only domestic origin. Though such policies have not yet been implemented, IIPA and BSA urge that this area be carefully monitored.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Breaking that into two bit:</p>
<h2>Open Source</h2>
<p>Firstly, it is curious to see industry object to legal non-pirated software. Secondly, many of BSA's members (if not most) use open source software, and a great many of them also produce open source software. <a href="http://hp.sourceforge.net/">HP</a> and <a href="http://www-03.ibm.com/linux/ossstds/">IBM</a> have been huge supporters of open source software. Even <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/">Microsoft has an open source software division</a>. [Intel][intel], <a href="http://www.sap.com/usa/about/newsroom/press.epx?pressid=11410">SAP</a>, <a href="http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/open_source/index.html">Cisco</a>, <a href="http://linux.dell.com/projects.shtml">Dell</a>, <a href="http://www.sybase.com/developer/opensource">Sybase</a>, <a href="http://www.entrust.com/news/index.php?s=43&item=702">Entrust</a>, <a href="http://about.intuit.com/about_intuit/press_room/press_release/articles/2009/IntuitPartnerPlatformAddsOpenSourceCommunity.html">Intuit</a>, <a href="http://www.synopsys.com/community/interoperability/pages/libertylibmodel.aspx">Synopsys</a>, <a href="http://www.apple.com/opensource/">Apple</a>, <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/22/jbuilder_eclipse/">Borland</a>, <a href="http://w2.cadence.com/webforms/squeak/">Cadence</a>, <a href="http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=6153839">Autodesk</a>, and <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9967593-16.html">Siemens</a> are all members of BSA which support open source software / produce at least some open source software. And <em>all</em> BSA members rely on open source software (as part of their core products, their web-server, their content management system, etc.) to a lesser or greater extent. BSA's left hand doesn't seem to know what its right hand -- its members -- are doing. Indeed, the IIPA does not seem to realise that the United States' government itself uses [open source software], and has been urged to <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7841486.stm">look at FOSS very seriously</a> and is doing so, especially under CIO Vivek Kundra. And that may well be the reason why the USTR could not include this cautionary message in the Special 301 report.</p>
<h2>Domestic Software</h2>
<p>As <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/indias-copyright-proposals-are-un-american-and-thats-bad.ars">this insightful article by Nate Anderson in Ars Technica</a> notes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Open source is bad enough, but a "buy Indian" law? That would be <a href="http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/sell2usgov-vendreaugouvusa/procurement-marches/buyamerica.aspx?lang=eng">an outrage</a> and surely something the US government would not itself engage in <a href="http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/sell2usgov-vendreaugouvusa/procurement-marches/ARRA.aspx?lang=eng">as recently as last year</a>. Err, right?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Furthermore, the IIPA submission do not provide any reference for their claim that "domestic origin" software is being thought of being made a mandatory requirement in governmental software procurement.<br />
</p>
<h2>WCT, WPPT, Camcording, and Statutory Damages</h2>
<p>The IIPA submission also wish that India would:</p>
<ol>
<li>Adopt a system of statutory damages in civil cases; allow compensation to be awarded in criminal cases;</li>
<li>Adopt an optical disc law;</li>
<li>Enact Copyright Law amendments consistent with the WCT and WPPT;</li>
<li>Adopt an anti-camcording criminal provision.</li>
</ol>
<p>Quick counters:</p>
<ol>
<li>Statutory damages (that is, an amount based on statute rather than actual loss) would result in ridiculousness such as the $1.92 million damages that the jury (based on the statutory damages) slapped on Jammie Thomas. The judge in that case <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/judge-slashes-monstrous-jammie-thomas-p2p-award-by-35x.ars">called the damage award</a> "monstrous and shocking" and said that veered into "the realm of gross injustice."</li>
<li>The reasons against an optical disc law are given above. Quick recap: it is a) unnecessary and b) harmful.</li>
<li>India has not signed the WCT and the WPPT. Indian law satisfies all our international obligations. Thus enacting amendments consistent with the WCT and the WPPT is not required.</li>
<li>Camcording of a film is in any case a violation of the Copyright Act, 1957, and one would be hard-pressed to find a single theatre that allows for / does not prohibit camcorders. Given this, the reason for an additional law is, quite frankly, puzzling. At any rate, IIPA in its submission does not go into such nuances.</li>
</ol>
<h2>Further conclusions</h2>
<p><a href="http://spicyipindia.blogspot.com/2010/05/us-special-301-report-and-not-so.html">Shamnad Basheer</a>, an IP professor at NUJS, offer the following as a response:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Dear USA,</p>
<p>India encourages you to mind your own business. We respect your sovereignty to frame IP laws according to your national priorities and suggest that you show us the same courtesy. If your grouse is that we haven't complied with TRIPS, please feel free to take us to the WTO dispute panel. Our guess is that panel members familiar with the English language will ultimately inform you that section 3(d) is perfectly compatible with TRIPS. And that Article 39.3 does not mandate pharmaceutical data exclusivity, as you suggest!
More importantly, at that point, we might even think of hauling you up before the very same body for rampant violations, including your refusal to grant TRIPS mandated copyright protection to our record companies, despite a WTO ruling (Irish music case) against you.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely,</p>
<p>India."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Basheer's suggestion seems to be in line with that Michael Geist who believes that other countries should join Canada and Israel in openly refusing to acknowledge the validity of the Special 301 Reports because they lack ['reliable and objective analysis'][geist-reliable]. And that thought serves as a good coda.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/2010-special-301'>http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/2010-special-301</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshDevelopmentConsumer RightsAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightPiracyAccess to MedicineIntellectual Property RightsData ProtectionFLOSSTechnological Protection MeasuresPublications2011-10-03T05:37:27ZBlog EntryCitizen 2.0?
http://editors.cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/citizen-2.0
<b>Exploring Research Questions, Frameworks, and Methods - A presentation was given by Minna Aslama, at CIS, on Nov 23rd @ 4.30pm , Bangalore. The Videos for the talk are given here.</b>
<h3>Abstract:</h3>
<p>The early and mid 1990s witnessed a surge of academic thinking and
public debates around the democratizing power of the Internet. The most
hopeful utopias of deliberative online communication and formation of
active ‘subaltern counter-publics’ (Fraser 1992/1997) were countered
with fears ranging from trivialization, fragmentation, even
disappearance of widely and commonly shared issues, to viral
distribution of non-democratic, ‘harmful’ content. Now the same debates
are re-emerging once again in era that is witnessing the explosion of
‘social production’ in a multitude of digital platforms.</p>
<p>The recent examples of the elections in two very different
societies, the United States and Iran, provide just two cases where
information production by non-professional individuals and loose
associations, distributed via informal networks including social
networking sites and microblogging, has played a major role in
democratic processes (e.g., Williams & Gulati 2007; Keim &
Clark 2009).</p>
<p>A question remains: do social networks facilitate platforms for
democratic debate and participation in our ‘post-broadcast’ democracies
(Prior 2007) characterized by ‘a networked information economy’
(Benkler 2006)? And further, is or can there exist such a phenomenon as
a ‘Citizen 2.0’ who actively participates in democratic processes
(issue driven and/or local, regional, national, transnational) via
digital media? So far academic scholarship has focused on theorization
rather than empirical analyses (e.g., Gripsrud 2009), has tended to
emphasize activities of social justice movements that are by default
networked and proactive (Aslama & Erickson 2009), and thus have
‘romanticized’ the participatory and democratizing nature of the
Internet, web 2.0 and mobile communications (while most quantitative
indicators tend to point towards concentrated and elite communication,
and while digital divide still clearly exists, Hindman 2009). Needless
to say, much of the hopeful theorization is European / Anglo-American,
and there seems to be relatively little cultural sensitivity in grand
visions of global public spheres (c.f., Castells 2008).</p>
<p>The talk will not claim to provide answers to these paramount
questions. Instead, Minna wished to raise more questions about (1) what
should be researched about mediated democracy and citizenry in our
time; what should we know? (2) How could we frame that research
theoretically and conceptually? And (3) what kinds of methodological
solutions might be useful in this context. Rather than presenting a
comprehensive research agenda, Minna suggested some ideas that would
broadly connect to macro, meso and micro-level view of media, power and
citizenship (c.f. Clegg 1989), and would illustrate those ideas with
some empirical examples of her current pilot work for a planned
multi-country study on the theme.</p>
<p>References:</p>
<ul><li>Aslama M. & Erickson I. (2009). Public Spheres, Networked
Publics, Networked Public Spheres? Tracking the Habermasian Public
Sphere in Recent Discourse. Fordham University, McGannon Center Working
Papers.Retrieved at:
http://www.fordham.edu/images/undergraduate/communications/public%20spheres,%20networked%20publics,%20networked%20public%20spheres.pdf
<br /></li></ul>
<ul><li>Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. How Social
Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven & London: Yale
University Press.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Castells, M. (2008). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil
Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. The Annals Of
The American Academy Of Political And Social Science, vol. 616, no. 1,
pp. 78-93.</li><li>Clegg, S. (1989). Frameworks of Power. London: Sage.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Fraser N. (1997(1992)). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A
Contribution to the Critique of an Actually Existing Democracy. In
Calhoun C (ed.). Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press. Pp., 109-142.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Gripsrud, J. (2009, March). Digitising the Public Sphere: Two Key Issues. Javnost-The Public, 16(1), 5-16.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Hindman, M. (2009). The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Keim N & Clark J (2009) Public Media 2.0 Field Report:
Building Social Media Infrastructure to Engage Publics. Twitter Vote
Report and Inauguration Report ’09. American University, center for
Social Media. <br />http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publications/public_media_20_field_report_building_social_media_infrastructure_to_engage/
(accessed 30 August 2009). </li></ul>
<ul><li>Prior, M. (2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.</li></ul>
<ul><li>Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. (2007). Social Networks in
Political Campaigns: Facebook and the 2006 Midterm Elections. Paper
presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science
Association.</li></ul>
<h3>Minna Aslama’s Bio:</h3>
<p>Minna Aslama is a researcher and a lecturer
at Fordham University, New York, and the University of Helsinki. She
holds a Ph.D. from the University of Helsinki and has taken part in
several international research activities including The Media Between
Culture and Commerce Project by the European Science Foundation, and
the research-advocacy project on Global Media Monitoring of news media
(GMMP, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2009). From 2008-2009, she served as the
Program Officer for the Necessary Knowledge for a Democratic Public
Sphere program at the Social Science Research Council. <br />Prior to
her academic career, she worked at the Division of Advancement for
Women of the UN Secretariat and at the Finnish Broadcasting Company in
the research, training and development unit. She has also served as a
consultant for various national and international organizations on
research and training, especially with regard to issues of media and
gender. <br />Her recent/ongoing research work includes new
conceptualizations of media audiences and the concept of
‘participation’, public service media and content diversity in the
digital era, and media policy flows in the globalizing media
environment. In addition, she is especially interested in new forms of
collaboration emerging in relation to the media justice and reform
movements. Together with Phil Napoli, she is currently editing a book
“Communication Research in Action” that depicts scholar-practitioner
collaborations in the field. <br />Contact: minna.aslama@helsinki.fi</p>
<h3>Videos<br /></h3>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbHlXQA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKFJwA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKGKQA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKGWgA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKJPwA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKKIgA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKKSgA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKLBQA"></embed>
<p> </p>
<embed width="250" height="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/g_dIgbKLEgA"></embed>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/citizen-2.0'>http://editors.cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/citizen-2.0</a>
</p>
No publisherradhaDevelopment2011-08-20T22:55:56ZBlog Entry