Vision - Michaelmas 2021

VISION

--------------------------------------------------------------------- Michaelmas 2021

A

PUBLICATION

OF

CAMBRIDGE

UNIVERSITY

INTERNATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

SOCIETY

011101D1G1T1SAT10N101101 AND DEVELOPMENT

Biometrics in International Development An

Interview

with

Sebastian

Marhart

Page 27

Digitisation in the Agricultural Sector: Smartfarming in Africa Jade Chamieh

- Page 6

The Neo-Colonial Politics of Technocratic Development Aid in Africa Rachel Beck & Asha Jaffar

- Page 11

Perspectives: Has digitisation facilitated the rise of “digital totalitarianism”?

- Page 35

Also this Issue...

CCTV IN SCHOOLING // EARTH DIGITISED // TECHNOLOGY AT THE BORDER //CHARITY IN THE AGE OF SOCIAL MEDIA // AN ILLUSION OF EQUITY // DECRYPTING THE DIGITAL FORTRESS // BIOMETRICS AND DEVELOPMENT

Foreword Dear Readers,

It is a pleasure to be sharing with you what is our most ambitious VISION magazine to date. In addition to a wide range of articles from students and academics on ‘Digitisation and Development’, I am particularly excited by the launch of VISION’s new Perspectives and Interviews sections. I would like to extent a huge thank-you to Sophie and the rest of the VISION team who have produced a truly excellent publication, and Lucy in particular whose artistic skills have transformed the magazine over the past three editions.

The pandemic forced CUID to fully digitise, with all of last year’s events being moved online. Although still facing challenges, we now are able to enjoy the benefits of in-person events while also hosting speakers from across the world online. If this edition of Vision has sparked your interest, I encourage you to come along to any of our speaker events this coming term, or check out the recommended podcasts and books in the back of the magazine.

I hope you enjoy reading this edition as much as I have, and look forward to our upcoming Lent edition: ‘Democracy Developing, Developing Democracy’. If you have any questions about CUID, or suggestions, feel free to get in touch with me at president@cuid.org.

Rob MacLennan President, 2021-22

Contents 03 CCTV IN SCHOOLING A discussion on the use of Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) and CCTV for addressing social issues in schools grounded in the example of Delhi's growing embrace of the technology.

06

11

EARTH DIGITISED

TECHNOLOGY AT THE

A look at new technologies for agricultural production: what they mean and how we embrace them.

15

BORDER The potential impact of remote surveillance systems on migrant safety and pushbacks in Europe.

POUNDS, LIKES AND SPREADSHEETS : CHARITY IN THE AGE OF SOCIAL MEDIA As our lives have moved online, so too has our giving. What does this portend for the future of philanthropy and international development?

19

23

AN ILLUSION OF EQUITY

DECRYPTING THE DIGITAL

A brief history of how efforts to progress technological advancement across Africa have been utilized both by former colonial nations, and now international development institutions, to reinvigorate imperial empire building, driving poverty and inequality.

FORTRESS Refugees’ experiences at borders are changing in the wake of new technologies. But is this technology helping to ensure their safety or does it simply encapsulate an ‘inhuman(e)’ approach to border control?

INTERVIEWS 27

32

SEBASTION MARHART:

ROWENA LUK:

Biometrics and

Digitization in the work of

development

NGOs

PERSPECTIVES 35 HAS DIGITISATION FACILITATED THE RISE OF “DIGITAL

UID 1

TOTALITARIANISM”?

V I S I

N

A Publication of Cambridge University International Development

A Note from the Editor...

Digitisation

has

become

such

an

invisible

part

of

our

worlds that we could, on occasion, forget just how much of an impact it can have. In our day-to-day lives, we may catch fleeting glimpses of how new technologies in this realm

are

advancing,

development,

they

but

are

in

the

field

continually

of

international

shifting

Vision Editor-in-Chief: Sophie Harbour

possible

approaches to global issues. What these shifts throw up are

complicated

debates

about

privacy,

morality,

and

dignity. How much personal information do we need to know to help people? Do we compromise a necessary ‘humanity’ in certain digitised processes? Yet, what might be possible for development if these technologies are embraced?

Vision Co-Editors: Anna Feest and Madeleine Lempert

Digitisation can streamline processes. This is significant for

activities

like

producing

food

and

encouraging

international philanthropy, but it may be detrimental in arenas that crave a human touch. Questions of how we balance

efficiency

with

accountability

or

Vision Interviews Sub-Editor: Maya Beney

convenience

with judgement are wound through the implementation of the digital. The simplicity offered by these solutions is not always faced

easily across

applicable

to

the

complex

the

At

the

same

opportunities

world.

for

international

countering

development,

social

time,

key

issues

they

challenges

including

offer in

Vision Perspectives Sub-Editor: Sofiyah Rasool

accountability,

speed, and accuracy.

The debates touched on across this issue of VISION are bound to continue in the years to come and helping put them

together

has

been

an

incredibly

interesting

and

rewarding process. It has been a pleasure to work with such a skilled team and to be able to include high-quality content for our readers. I hope everyone enjoys learning

Vision Sub-Editors: Olivia Byrne, Adithya Mohan, Phoebe Penfold, Anna Sayles and Etienne Tracey.

about the wide variety of topics and takes note of what to

watch

interactions

out

for

as

between

development worlds.

we the

continue digital

to and

see

growing

international

Sophie Harbour Editor-in-Chief

Artistic Director: Lucy Williams 2

CCTV in Schooling A discussion on the use of Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) and CCTV for addressing social issues in schools grounded in the example of Delhi's growing embrace of the technology.

by ALICE HORRELL Activists and digital rights activists are raising alarm at

The security versus privacy debate has been a dynamic

the increased surveillance throughout India. There have

conversation

for

been mass rollouts of CCTV, with some cameras using

complicated

further

facial

in

recognition, making intrusive tracking far easier. Whilst

facial

there are arguments in favour of increased surveillance

recognition

response

to

technology,

rises

in

implemented

violent

crimes.

largely

This

by

the

as

from

analyse its place in our lives.

missing

children

to

attempting

to

advances,

time

recognition technology (FRT) has a wide range of uses, relocating

technology

some

it

is

now.

A

debate

introduction

important

to

of

only facial

critically

identify a woman in distress. In schools, it is used to alert security to whether there are trespassers yet it is

Before exploring the Indian case, it is worth mentioning

also increasingly serving other functions. These include

some concerns around FRT and racial bias. According to

monitoring

researchers at the National Institute of Standards and

invigilation.

3

behaviour,

managing

truancy

and

exam

Technology, FRT has a dangerous bias. They suggest it

falsely identifies Black and Asian faces 10 to 100 times

development, known as randomized control trials, has

more than white faces.

been heavily criticised for lacking credibility on a larger scale.

Arguably,

surveillance

is

also

informing

a

Black women are particularly vulnerable. Joy Buolamwini

missionary complex which poses a serious threat to the

of the Algorithmic Justice League is vocal about the

progress

racial

foreign researchers running experiments on poor people

biases

in

her

documentary,

The

Coded

Gaze,

where she demonstrates how the AI she was working

of

developing

countries

that

do

not

need

to grow their economies.

with would only recognise her if she was wearing a white mask. Introducing this AI into schools would only

Al Jazeera reported on the Delhi government's claim

put kids from marginalised backgrounds in more danger

that the increased use of CCTV in schools has reduced

of being profiled.

truancy, bullying and vandalism. Furthermore, there have been several high profile attack cases in public schools

Amnesty International has also been critical about the

recently where CCTV helped to persecute. There was a

use of FRT through their ongoing campaign to ‘Ban the

high profile case in Ryan International School, where a 7

Scan’. They have focused on its use in New York by the

year old was found to be murdered by a 16 year old by

police but also private bodies such as landlords. They

looking at the CCTV footage. This was after the police

are

had wrongly arrested the local bus conductor.

critical

of

the

racial

biases,

especially

when

it

comes to using virtual lineups or Instagram photos to track down people, heavily targeting black and brown communities.

These

biases

are

important

to

keep

By ‘invading the pedagogical space of the

in

classroom’ through robotising the education

mind as we explorethis technology in different parts of

process, pupils are being denied the

the world.

opportunity for a truly engaging education.

In

2019,

the

first

FRT

cameras

were

installed

in

SH

- Anita Rampal

Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya, a Delhi public (government) school of 1,500 pupils. The majority of these students are

Examples have shown that there may be some positive

from

outcomes

lower

socioeconomic

backgrounds.

The

CCTV

when

it

comes

to

increased

surveillance.

installed is live-streamed to parents which allows them

However, there are fears that teachers will struggle with

to keep track of their children and ‘spy’ on the teachers

the feeling of being watched. Many of the proponents

and there are also technologies that alert parents as to

of the current CCTV rollout are aware of this and claim

when their children get on and off the school bus. The

that there are ways in which camera positioning can be

footage can be accessed by many others, including the

used to gauge the reactions of the students to check if

education minister.

a

teacher

is

themselves.

There

has

been

some

early

evidence

that

increased

surveillance has led to positive outcomes when it comes

teachers’

present This

without

would

presence

but

monitoring

give also

an

the

teacher

indication

class

of

the

engagement

and

teaching quality.

to education in India. Esther Duflo carried out a study from 2003 to 2006 on Seva Mandir schools, which are

Anita Rampal, a professor in the Faculty of Education at

NGO run and had a teacher absentee rate of 44%.

Delhi

Teachers were given a time-stamped camera and asked

rollouts. Rampal claims that it is in line with the increase

to take a photo of the class in the morning and then 5

in monitoring teachers through standardised tests and

hours later at the end of the day. Their pay was then

other metrics which only limit the creativity needed for

linked to the number of days taught. This scheme saw

meaningful

teaching.

an

space

the

increase

resulted

in

in 34

the

attendance

more

days

of

rate

of

schooling

teachers per

and

year

in

University

of

education

warns

against

By

‘invading

classroom’

process,

the

pupils

move

the

through are

in

CCTV

pedagogical

robotising

being

denied

the the

comparison to a control group where cameras were not

opportunity for a truly engaging education. Confidence

used

and

to

and,

assess

instead,

random

attendance.

checks were employed

However,

this method

of

trust

of

teachers

are

being

eroded

as

they

internalise the ever-watchful eye of parents, which can

4

become psychologically damaging. Rampal argues that

We have to ask ourselves what the ideal development

this measure in schools represents a low-cost way of

outcome of this extensive use of surveillance would be.

dealing with a more systemic problem, one in which the

Increased

potential

Duflo study, may benefit the students greatly in rural

negative

outcomes

have

not

been

fully

teacher

issue

and

the

sensitivity needed to respond well.

where

the

students and teachers feel under constant surveillance,

the

environment

through

areas.

of

an

shown

undermines

complexity

creating

as

evaluated. Using CCTV footage to stop bullying also the

However,

attendance,

the

policed at every turn, may not foster the creativity the next

generation

needs

to

tackle

the

world.

Blindly

Apar Gupta, a Delhi lawyer and director at the Internet

accepting the intrusion of this technology into our lives

Freedom

and

Foundation,

warns

that

this

panopticon-like

the

lives

of

children

could

have

some

very

surveillance will lead to children self-policing. ‘Panoptic

dangerous outcomes. We can never rely on seeing AI as

schooling’, a term explored by Coyle in 2018 described

the silver bullet and have to be critical of extending the

a

power of law enforcement as a way of dealing with

site

of

increased

discipline

and

conformity.

Mechanisms of power are imposed on students from a

issues which are far more systemic.

young age, the site of social reproduction, but have varying effects depending largely on the socioeconomic

We have to ask ourselves what the ideal

background of the pupil.

development outcome of this extensive A study carried out in 2010 by McCahill and Finn of British

teenagers

that

those

from

use of surveillance would be.

higher

socioeconomic backgrounds felt largely immune to the

India's experience is currently unique but investment into

surveillance whereas students from more marginalised

surveillance is slowly being echoed across the world.

backgrounds reported feeling monitored and punished

There are various projects funded by the US, the EU and

by them. CCTV, and technology as a whole, is never

China

neutral.

surveillance networks internationally through acts such

Monitoring

hierarchy

5

found

of

in

control.

this

way

Schools

enforces

like

SH

a

top

down

Sarvodaya

Bal

amongst

others

which

are

aimed

at

growing

as training and equipping ‘cyber police officers’. These

Vidyalaya, where the majority of students come from

networks

lower

to

corruption or undermine governments whilst all the time

respond well to this. Concern with development would

increasing the power of international spy agencies and

need to focus on creating an environment where these

the countries who fund them. The use of CCTV and FRT

students feel they have the space and freedom to learn.

for tackling social issues must thus be carefully watched.

socioeconomic

backgrounds

are

unlikely

can

facilitate

human

rights

abuses,

fund

Earth Digitised A look at new technologies for agricultural production: what they mean and how we embrace them.

by JADE CHAMIEH

About

45%

of

the

world’s

population relies on agriculture for its

livelihood,

four

yet

households

around of

below

the

poverty

those

in

extreme

approximately million

80%

people

areas

and

dependent

Of

poverty, the

740

in

rural

live

are

in

live

line.

of

that

on

one

farmers

thus

highly

agriculture.

For

a

sector which employs almost half of the population’s main d’oeuvre, it

also

lacks,

for

many

-

and

especially for those in developing countries

-

much

economic

stability or sustainability.

However, recent developments in agriculture have paved the way for a brighter future, both in terms of economic

security

and

environmental preservation. Digital agriculture

now

challenges

our

preconceived ideas of agriculture and farmers.

When

we

picture

agriculture,

we

the

should

world no

of

longer

think only of the stereotypical rural farmer

employing

manual rather

traditional

techniques, diversify

include

our

high-tech

but

or

should

thinking

to

agricultural

devices that may be used in both rural

and

urban

settings.

The

digitisation of agriculture is here, and

it

is

innovating

to

improve

crops, lives, and biodiversity.

6

Up-and-coming technologies Precision farming methods have been seen to improve productivity, reduce costs and optimize space, leading to better economic and ecological outcomes like increased yields and lower resource use.

Precision-farming methods

1.

Drones

Drones may be the future of agriculture. Although highly dependent on agricultural imports, Dubai plans to be self- sufficient with their food security by 2030, scaling up agricultural drone technology and investing in various drone and aircraft products. Crop conditions can be measured through the drones’ flight-planning software, Quantum VRT design, and farmers’ dependence on fertilisers or boosting yields can therefore be reduced. This makes for reduced costs, and limits the use of natural resources, both of which serve socio-economic and ecological development. According to a McKinsey & Company report, by reducing costs and improving yields, the use of drones could generate between $85 billion and $115 billion in additional value to global farming revenues.

2.

Satellite imaging

Farmers can now use crop imagery transmitted through satellite to control crop growth. The digitisation of plant control means that plant growth is now precisely predicted and farmers do not have to visit the crops in person to manage them. In India, farmers have been using satellite imagery to estimate wheat yields a month ahead, which allows them to plan storage and general management of commerce accordingly. In Indonesia, satellite imagery provides an assessment of rice paddies’ growth rate, which can be used to measure the extent of crop damage in case of bad weather.

More generally, satellite imagery is now used in a variety of other agricultural processes. , For example, yield maps allow for better use of crop fertilisers as well as reducing the risk of crop contamination.

Likewise, locating areas of natural shelter for livestock can ensure protection of biodiversity and prevent the spread of diseases, by drawing out environmentally protected areas, and reducing the risks of inter-species contamination.

Satellite imagery thus makes crop management, land and resource use, as well as physical labour easier for farmers, as they can more efficiently

handle

plant

growth,

monitor

inputs,

and

detect

crop

anomalies. Reliable computerised weather modeling allows farmers to anticipate any weather conditions, such as frost and wind, that could potentially harm their crops, thus mitigating significant losses.

7

Soil mapping

3.

to show huge advances in food security, production and environmental

protection,

there

are

still

widespread

largely

beliefs that they are unsafe, both environmentally and

determined by the availability and suitability of land,

for health. This is because most public debate about

today they are based on many other variables - such as

smart breeding centers around GMO’s containing genes

the

from

Although

farming

natural

models

were

characteristics

of

traditionally

the

soil

itself.

This

other

species,

which

some

fear

might

have

information is now shown in soil maps, and is stored on

unknown and potentially detrimental effects on health.

associated data sets. Using statistics, field trials and

However, gene-editing methods in smart breeding do

crowdsourcing,

not

digital

soil

maps

are

increasingly

transfer

foreign

genes,

but

have

a

different

popular for planning where, what and how to farm.

technical mechanism.

Soil

Information

Despite

the

Gates

within these plants, and that there are no side effects to

mapping

Service

-

is

used

by

the

Africa

(ASIS)

which

is

ASIS

works

with

Soil

funded

by

the

fact

that

no

foreign

DNA

is

introduced

African

the consumption of smartly-bred crops, many countries

governments - particularly in Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria

and populations still fear and over-regulate the smart-

and Tanzania - to develop continent-wide digital soil

breeding process. For example, the Court of Justice of

maps

the

Foundation.

and

to

optimise

a

range

agricultural

of

practices

and

European

Union

still

considers

smart-breeding

a

include

potentially dangerous form of genetic modification, and

private stakeholders and research institutions, like the

thus carries out extensive risk assessment, authorisation

Earth

procedures, and other regulatory measures, rendering

maximise

results.

Institute

These

of

collaborations

Columbia

also

University,

the

World

Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), and Rothamsted Research,

smart-breeding hard to implement in practice.

Overall, the project aims to increase smallholder farmer productivity, and to promote policy changes that favour

Most supermarkets have a barcode on their agricultural

sustainable

products that, if scanned, can reveal information about

production

methods

at

the

private

and

where they were planted, how they were transported

public level.

and where they were distributed. This is known as RFID technology.

' Smart farming ' methods

‘Smart farming’ methods are also being used to make

For any drone, satellite, sensor or soil map to function

agriculture

Many

and to be on the market, a specific technology called

companies, such as Harvest Crop Robotics or Harvest

the RFID - radio frequency identification - has to be

Automation INC, have been concentrating on building

used. This tool allows memorising, stocking and saving

new

data

easier

pervasive

for

the

automation

human

task

force.

technologies,

which

could

on

a

specific

device

or

through

a

specific

potentially replace human physical labour. Farmers use

platform. This data can be accessed from any location

a

with permission. The blockchain-type based technology

variety

of

technologies

to

reduce

their

physical

workload, which are known as pervasive automation.

allows

Agricultural

transport and distribution.

optimise vehicles

robots

seeding like

guided

and

by

RTK

fertilisation

tractors

and

navigation and

also

systems

allow

autonomous

products

to

be

traced

during

production,

for

farming

equipment, such as combines or balers, to communicate and operate effectively to manage the crops.

Modern agriculture goes beyond planting, upkeep and harvesting to involve genetics, biology, and engineering to carry out smart breeding - crops with drought or heat resistant optimal

properties breeding

that

can

survive

conditions.

rough

or

non-

Mini-chromosomal

technology can not only help reduce waste, but can also improve productivity and maximise yield output.

Although

plant

breeding

technologies

that

entail

genetic engineering and gene editing have been proven

8

inefficiency

and

food

traceability.

Blockchain

technologies in the food industry help to ensure food safety, as each contributor in the food value chain is made

accountable

and

traceable.

Through

RFID

technology, and the blockchain’s ledger, food products not

only

become

safer,

but

market

pricing

is

more

balanced, as it is now based on the information of the entire value chain rather than the more individualised judgment of those involved in the food industry.

As food insecurity increases, with water shortages and droughts

becoming

more

frequent,

the

global

population expected to increase to around 9.7 billion in 2050,

agricultural

technologies

that

optimise

food

production and storage methods are more important than

What could digitisation mean agriculture and development?

for

ever.

According

connectivity

and

to

McKinsey

digitisation

&

are

Company,

if

implemented

successfully in the agricultural sector, the industry could add an additional 500$ billion to the global GDP by 2030.

Agricultural practices are often vilified. The Food and Agriculture described

Organisation livestock

significant

contributors

environmental crops

and

the as

to

problems”.

animal

of

farming

today’s

Indeed,

products

United

“one

of

Nations the

most

the

releases

most

serious

production roughly

of

13%

of

global greenhouse gas emissions, while the conversion of

forest

and

savannah

into

land

for

How easy is it to transition from traditional to digital agriculture?

Changing mindsets and preconceptions

agricultural

production is equal to roughly 11% of global greenhouse

Although the United States is a highly technologically

gas emissions.

advanced country, only about a quarter of farms use highly connected and innovative digital tools. This can

Food

waste,

ecosystem

food

scarcity,

degradation,

resource

loss

of

exhaustion, biodiversity,

be largely explained through a fear mindset, whereby farmers

doubt

the

usefulness

of

new

innovations.

deforestation, and labour exploitation are all underlying

Indeed, many believe that technological innovation will

issues

mean

many

of

us

associate

with

the

agricultural

displacement

physical Although largely

sustainable

depend

on

solutions

the

to

concurrent

feeding

the

of

many

farmers.

Digital

technologies have often been associated with replacing

industry. But, perhaps, digitisation can change that.

world

implementation

of

government policies, new technologies could decrease

labor

with

machines.

However,

this

displacement may only apply to certain manual tasks, whereas digital technologies generally enhance labour opportunities.

the effect of agriculture on climate and biodiversity.

Algorithms that process statistical and qualitative data

Indeed, the digitisation of agriculture has opened an

on plant health, soil condition, temperature or humidity,

entirely

can

employment. This could not only enable certain farmers

suggest

farmers

can

technologies,

a

range

use.

of

outcomes

Through

decision-making

AI

and

and and

techniques

other

digital

harvesting

are

sector,

encourage

a

new

agriculture industry.

More

There

importantly,

the

digitisation

of

agriculture

has

creating

many

opportunities

for

to upgrade their skills and diversify their work, but also

facilitated for the farmers, and productivity maximised.

helped to fix issues such as food fraud, supply chain

9

new

are

also

wave

political

of

and

workers

to

economic

associated with digital agriculture.

join

the

challenges

Planning for new policies Given

the

range

of

technologies

and

stakeholders

digital agriculture involves, most products have to be deemed secure before they are put on the market. Many governments blockchain

are

skeptical

technologies

exploitation.

They

are

about

and

the

its

therefore

future

potential

in

the

of for

process

of

implementing laws to prevent system-hacking or systemfailure.

Finding funding Products like soil maps, satellites, and agri-robots are not

cheap,

subsidise countries, financial

the

not

NGOs

all

governments

technologies. sector

obstacles,

connectivity, many

and

new

given as

invested

in

example,

thanks

a

well

digital to

has

In

had

to

especially lack as

of

can

afford

Sub-Saharan confront

in

the

private

agriculture

sector

significant

transition

infrastructure.

to

However,

players

infrastructure.

private-sector

to

African

investments,

have For the

agriculture sectors in India, Myanmar and Kenya have improved their digital connectivity.

Looking forward Digital

agriculture

environmental technologies

promises

and have

well

financial become

point

an

from of

both

view.

attractive

an

Digital

market,

for

investors and farmers alike.

With

more

precise

farming

methods,

workers

in

the

agriculture industry have achieved better yield profits, improving

socio-economic

prospects

for

many,

while

also generating new employment opportunities in AI and engineering. solution

to

Digital issues

agriculture

of

food

seems

security

like

and

a

viable

safety,

by

reducing the spread of diseases and contamination.

Digital agriculture has also opened up the possibilities for

farming

increasing

in in

urban

areas.

popularity,

Vertical

and

is

farming

usually

is

now

ecologically

sustainable. Digital agriculture is a vital tool to reach some of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals,

such

as

employment

opportunities,

ending

poverty, and boosting economic growth, encouraging innovation, industries and infrastructure, protecting the environment, as well as building sustainable cities and communities

that

would

engage

in

responsible

consumption and production.

Whilst there are political, legal, and economic issues surrounding these new technologies, they also provide many

opportunities

to

engage

in

responsible

consumption and production, bringing many benefits to societies

around

the

world,

and

enhancing

food

security.

10

Technology at the Border: The potential impact of remote surveillance systems on migrant safety and pushbacks in Europe.

by DARYA DJAVAHERY-FARSI The border between Greece and Turkey runs approximately 200 kilometres. While part of the land border follows the river Evros, the largest section of the border is in the Mediterranean sea. Debate around the management of this border has been at the heart of European politics for the past 10 years. Since 2012, there has been a surge in the numbers of border crossings between Greece and Turkey as a result of the Syrian conflict and the long lasting effects of political unrest across the MiddleEast. Notably, in 2015 more than one million migrants crossed the border towards Europe.

To

contextualise

these

numbers,

the

total

number

of

refugees

living

in

Europe as of 2020 represents 0.6% of its overall population (Statistics on migration to Europe, European Commission).

In October 2020, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) signed a

€50

million contract with Airbus and the Israeli Aerospaces Industries (IAI), a state

owned

manufacturer,

to

fund

a

Remotely

Piloted

Aircraft

System

(RPAS).

This

contract is one of the European Union’s many ventures aimed at border control and security. The aircrafts are equipped with infrared technology and patrol radars, which enables them to create a "real time naval picture in geographical areas for potential surveillance interests" (airbus.com, 20/10/2020). RPAS technology could have a phenomenal impact on the safety of migrants by surveilling irregular border crossings and ensuring that aid can be deployed faster, yet Frontex, which has in the past failed to prevent human rights violations against migrants and worked alongside local border guards carrying out pushback, has not stated the intended use of this technology, the agency has. It should give us pause to consider how discourse around

humanitarian

crises

like

migration

is

shaped

by

security,

control

and

technology.

Statistics compiled by the European Union jointly with Frontex show that 2020 saw 19 000 irregular border crossings in the western Mediterranean (Statistics on migration to Europe, European Commission). An irregular border crossing can happen on land, or most often in the case of the external EU border with Turkey, by sea. These crossings are extremely dangerous for migrants. The Missing Migrant Project notes that

since

2014

Mediterranean.

an What

estimate can

of

12,000

explain

in

migrants

part

these

have

been

numbers

is

lost the

at fact

sea

in

that

the

most

migrants are confronted with a ‘pushback’, meaning that in some instances they must attempt to cross several times.

Phievos Simenodis, a member of the Border Monitoring Network explains what a pushback is:

"An instance in which people are entering a country and are apprehended having not been registered and given the opportunity to file in an asylum claim, and are sent back to the place where they came from, having been denied due process. This can happen directly or indirectly, sometimes people are sent back instantaneously, or sometimes a pushback can take several days".

11

With regards to irregular border crossings in the mediterranean, Frontex’s use of drone technology is non-binding from a legal standpoint. This means, as Phil McDuffy notes, that “The legal obligation to aid

a

vessel

unmanned

in

distress

aerial

06/08/2019).

does

not

vehicle”

From

2015

apply

to

an

(theguardian.com,

to

2020

the

Sophia

military project run by the European Union saved 35000 migrants at sea. A report by the Human rights

commissioner

markedly means

shifted

military

notes

to

ships

that

aerial are

Frontex

has

surveillance,

not

being

now

which

deployed

to

patrol and can no longer assist migrants at sea.

The

same

report

also

states

that

information

gathered through airplanes and drones are being shared with “the relevant authorities” including the Libyan

Coast

“seems

to

guard

be

interceptions

and

that

particularly

and

this

information

conducive

returns

by

the

to

further

Libyan

Coast

Guard to unsafe ports, contrary to international maritime and human rights law”.

Additionally, agency have

instances

witnessing

emerged

of

the

pushback

border

and

(nytimes.com

control

covering

it

26/11/2020).

up The

Frontex Scrutiny Working Group states that while Frontex did not carry out pushbacks, it ran joint operations

with

local

border

guards

enacting

human rights violations “As a result, Frontex did not prevent

these

future

fundamental

Johansson, criticised

violations,

EU

home

Frontex

commitment

nor

to

reduce

rights

for hire

affairs failing 40

the

risk

violations”.

of

Ylva

commissioner, to

meet

fundamental

their rights

monitors and was only operating with 5 in early 2021 (politico.eu 22/02/2021). These observations are

very

alarming,

oversight

on

operates,

and

guards

and

how its their

there an

is

a

general

organism

associations history

like

with

of

lack

local

violence

of

Frontex border against

migrants does not bode well for its use of border surveillance

technology.

If

the

agency

does

not

have a record or an intention of ensuring migrants safety, why is it massively investing in surveillance technologies?

All

seems

to

indicate

that

investment in such technologies are a response to a perceived ‘security’ need by the EU which helps monitor

the

mediterranean

while

preventing

effective military presence at sea.

12

Commission,

16/07/2020),

which

are

now

being

pursued by the International Penal Court for ‘war crimes’ against

migrants

Examples

like

technologies

(theguardian.com,

this

in

further

the

surveillance

and

16/04/2021).

case

that

control

at

use

of

European

borders should be carefully scrutinised, to prevent abuse and violence against migrants. It also raises the issue of migration

being

perceived

as

a

threat

in

political

discourse surrounding security.

Studying the border between Israel and Palestine, the architect Eyal Weizman explains that a management of the border guided by the notion of ‘security’ implies that the enemy is already on the inside. In his seminal book, Hollow Land, he explores in depth how the ideology of ‘security’ motivates border control and leads to forms of governance

in

which

the

line

between

police

and

military actions become blurred. Here, security concerns and the political feeling of urgency has given growing agency to local actors with not enough monitoring. The by-proxi implication of Frontex in human rights violations attests to these blurred lines.

In

response

to

this,

the

work

done

by

the

Border

Monitoring Network is an example of how a humane response

to

violence

documenting

and

at

the

listening

to

border

migrants’

is

about

voices.

As

exemplified by Simon Campbell: “our database online is built of oral testimonies that are anonymised, they are collected

through

individuals

or

experience,

small

small

the

chronology

one

moment

of

the

to

groups,

one to

of

event

interviews document

with their

apprehension,

and

any

the

additional

information.”

The lack of hard evidence on how information gathered by these technologies impact the pushback apparatus

Centering

also stems from the fact that there is a rising trend of

these border control technologies is essential in making

pushback being carried out by private vessels as noted

sure the border is managed in a non-violent manner. We

by the 2019 commissioner for human rights report. These

should

technologies

‘security’

gather

are

can being

be fed

harmful to

if

local

the

information

actors

who

they

carry

out

also

discourse

remain

when

legitimises

it

detrimental

to

actors

RPAS

drone

has

to

be

then

monitored

and

regulated

to

and

on

critical feeds

investment

pushback. The relationship of Frontex with these local

prevent abuse.

in

migrant’s

the

of

lived

the

into

an

experiences

semantic

technologies safety.

technology

that

Assuredly

by

use

ideology

Fontex

the

of

of

which

can

be

use

should

of be

criticised if it is a way to evade the legal responsibility of

13

the

aiding

migrants

at

sea.

Ultimately

how

new

The policies pushed forward by the European Union can

technologies at the border are used depends largely on

help situate the ideologies which motivate investment in

how we frame immigration in our political discourse and

such projects. For example, it has in the past funded

how closely we monitor local actors in the way they

organisations such as the Lybian coast guard (European

shape the space of the border.

This article gives a very broad overview of the complexities of technology use at the border, yet it falls prey to the very thing it denounces: detracting from lived experience of violence at the border by looking at numbers and facts. I would like to leave you with a testimony gathered from a friend, M. who told me the story of one of her border crossings and her experience of pushback: One memory of a game [migrants call an attempted crossing a game] has stayed with me vividly. At night we crossed the river Evros by tube boat [small inflatable boats]. The boat was intended for 4 but I think there were 9 of us on board. After crossing the river we slept in the forest for a week, we could hear the sound of cattle, they were wearing bells around their neck. We had to stay hidden the whole time.

To this day when my son hears the sound of bells he tells me "Mom, I feel like I need to go and hide somewhere". We walked for a very long time. We could not use flashlights so we only had the light of the moon.

We would walk each night till dawn. During the day they would hide us away. After three days we ran out of food and water. We did not eat anything for two days, we would fill our water bottles with the water left aside for the cattle, it was horrifying. We would let the water sit so the dirt would sink to the bottom, and drink a few sips to hold off a bit longer. My son [she laughs], imagine my son who was such a picky eater back home, he ate leaves off of trees. I would find grape leaves and wash them the best I could so he could eat some.

to feed the children, we handed over some money and in exchange they bought some biscuits for them. The next day they put 60/70 of us in a truck. It was so warm and suffocating inside, I have asthma so they had me sit near the door, because I could barely breathe. It was horrifying. They took us back to another centre near the border of Turkey. They kept us in prisons that were so dirty the children could not sleep on the floor. I held my son on my lap every night so he could sleep. We had nothing with us to throw on the floor - every-time we crossed the smugglers would have us leave all of our belongings behind. Then at one in the morning the police came and stamped numbers in the palms of our hands, like we were sheep. They took us near the border, from there they had us cross the river with small tube boats. In every boat there were two police officers with us but their faces were covered with ski masks.

Once we crossed the river, some hundred of us, from all countries and backgrounds would walk in the forest till we found our way out. There we would be apprehended by the Turkish police again and kept in custody for 7 days. From there we would spend one night in the camp of Edernei, it was so cold during the night. In the morning after they registered us they would finally send us back to Istanbul.

Then they sent a car our way, seventeen of us got into a 5 person car. In a town 100km from the border the driver drove the car down a one way street and that’s when we got pulled over by the police. And then the driver, who must have been driving at 30km an hour, opened the door and threw himself out while the car was still moving. The police transferred us to a place where they were gonna carry out interrogations. We were all in a terrible state, so tired, hungry and thirsty, but the police didn’t care.

The first thing that they did was to take away our belts, our shoelaces and our phones, so we could not contact NGOs. They searched us so thoroughly, I think I could not have hidden a piece of lint from them even if I had tried. Then they took us to the prison. We begged them

14

Pounds, Likes and Spreadsheets: Charity in the Age of Social Media As our lives have moved online, so too has our giving. What does this portend for the future of philanthropy and international development?

by ISAAC ROSE-BERMAN

1

In March of this year, Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s bearded, nose-ring wearing yogi CEO, who only eats one meal a day, posted a link.

It

directed

users

to

Cent,

an

‘ad-free

creator

network

that

allows users to offer each other crypto rewards for good posts and

comments’,

where

he

was

auctioning

off

his

first

ever

Tweet as an NFT (non-fungible token). That token– a snapshot of Dorsey’s 2006 Tweet which reads “just setting up my twttr–” sold for $2.9 million. Immediately after it sold, Dorsey converted the proceeds and gave the money to GiveDirectly, a charity that provides unconditional cash transfers to families living in extreme poverty.

Dorsey’s

was

GiveDirectly, sector,

had

twenty

seven

largest

not a

even

received. year

This

largest

charity

Just

old

cryptocurrency

contribution.

the

favourite

a

month

co-founder after

spurned

a

cryptocurrency

among prior

of

Bitcoin), highly

many

in

Vitalik

Ethereum posted

crypto

Buterin, (the

his

publicised

donation

the

the

second

$4

million

donation

from

Elon Musk, then the second richest man in the world.

None of this story probably makes sense to many people and the specifics – cryptocurrency, NFTs, etc. – may be out of date a few years from now. But the story is indicative of a larger trend, which will persist regardless of which direction Bitcoin’s price moves: social media’s effect on philanthropy and international development.

Giving,

communication,

now

along occurs

with

all

online

other

and

is

forms

of

increasingly

performative. Donors and charities alike are guided by clicks and likes, funnelling pounds and dollars towards trendy causes.

The result is variable and unpredictable effects on international development, annually,

an

industry

influencing

the

which

welfare

directs of

trillions

citizens

and

of

dollars

stability

of

governments across the world.

International

development,

and

overseas

philanthropy

more

generally, is a relatively new phenomenon that accelerated in the early-to-mid-20th century. Before this, most charity was provided by individual wealthy benefactors and the church, to

15

those in their own communities (excluding missionaries, whose

intentions

and

actual

impacts

described in purely charitable terms).

cannot

be

The rich gave

both to benefit the disadvantaged and to maintain their elite position in highly unequal systems, relying on their generosity– or at least the appearance of it– to avoid revolts by those at the lower rungs of society.

Today,

governments

in

industrialized

nations

are

expected to pay for many of the public goods provided In the U.S., tycoons such as John D. Rockefeller and

by Gilded Age philanthropists, such as libraries, schools

Andrew Carnegie donated vast sums towards their own

and hospitals, stripping wealthy citizens of easily bought

favoured

goodwill at home. At the same time, Western middle

causes,

with

little

oversight.

Carnegie

(who

was born in Scotland but moved to the U.S. at a young

classes

age)

pervasive,

encapsulated

the

underlying

bargain

of

have

grown

and

poverty

concentrating

severe

has

become

human

less

suffering

in

philanthropy during this period, writing in his 1889 article

poorer countries. Western philanthropy, accordingly, is

The Gospel of Wealth that, ‘the millionaire [is] but a

increasingly directed overseas.

trustee for the poor; entrusted for a season with a great part

of

the

increased

administering could

or

it

for

would

wealth

the

have

of

the

community

done

for

community,

far

itself’.

better

but

than

Similar

it

trends

Social people

media to

has

accelerated

hardship

unprecedented

these

beyond

degree.

In

trends,

their

exposing

borders

previous

to

generations,

an one

existed in the U.K. with Victorian philanthropists, such as

might have discovered a far away major earthquake or

George

other

Peabody

and

Thomas

Holloway,

becoming

famous through their charitable efforts.

great

disaster

through

the

newspaper

or

a

television segment. Now every tragedy is just a Tweet away. This rapid diffusion of information means that 6

Yet

while

the

which

out of the top 10 largest U.K. charities are now focused

accompanied industrialisation created a new class with

internationally. Furthermore, social media’s promotion of

unprecedented wealth, it also eventually led to larger

the

governments and a more organised working class, which

culminated in these platforms accounting for more than

diminished

half of all donations to online fundraisers.

the

economic

ability

of

development

society’s

richest

to

avoid

most

controversial

and

extreme

content

has

accountability. With increasing urbanisation, the massive increase

appeared

Social media has done more than change the type of

especially stark. As the prevalence and awareness of

in

inequality

causes people give to; it has also changed the nature of

human

their giving. A cursory scroll through most social media

misery

philanthropy

rose,

and

during

it

this

became

individual

period

obvious

responsibility

private

alone

were

feeds

is

likely

to

show

birthday

fundraisers

and

insufficient to improve living standards. This generated

GoFundMe

political support for a more robust welfare state, with

highlighting

Winston Churchill stating in 1908 that Britain ought to,

encourage

‘underpin

publicization of philanthropy: Facebook’s default action

the

existing

voluntary

agencies

by

a

comprehensive system - necessarily at a lower level - of

for

State Action’.

one’s

posts, their and

donations generosity

with

people

benevolence. facilitate

through with

this

the friends

advocating Social

for

media

personalization

site and

is

to

and sites and

share

acquaintances.

16

For the richest members of society, these trends have

In addition to changing how people give and what they

been taken to the extreme. At a time when complaints

give to, social media has also changed how charities

over

solicit donations. Two major strategies have emerged:

insufficient

giving

and

critiques

of

self-serving

donations are pervasive, funding a new museum wing is

impassioned appeals and calculated utilitarianism.

no longer enough to excuse other evils. Even signing the Giving Pledge (a promise to donate half of one’s wealth

The first option is intuitive. Social media algorithms feed

before they die), is seen as insufficient. Many of the

on

world’s

wealthiest

are

wary

of

incurring

public

opprobrium that they use social media to display their donations;

all

the

while

condemning

capitalism

and

stories.

This

lives

activism seen on social media is purely self-serving; the effects vary immensely. While critics deride movements

style

of

improved This isn’t to say that all, or even most, philanthropy and

and

explosive

imagery,

incentivising

is

well

encapsulated

by

Save

the

Children, a UK based organisation focused on improving the

wealth inequality.

controversy

charities to post their most heart-wrenching videos and

young

people

education,

around

the

healthcare,

world

and

through

economic

opportunity. Their social media posts often highlight the stories of individual recipients living in horrible conditions and implore viewers to donate.

such as the ice bucket challenge as performative and ineffective, the benefits can be real. That campaign raised over $100 million for ALS charities and funded breakthrough research. Other efforts, meanwhile, are less

successful.

Nigeria

The

garnered

#bringbackourgirls

support

from

Kim

campaign

Kardashian,

in

Pope

Francis, David Cameron and more. However it not only failed to rescue the kidnapped students but may have caused

Boko

Haram,

responsible, to start young

women.

the

kidnapping

Online

terrorist and

activism

organization

ransoming

and

charity

more can

galvanize bystanders and reach audiences, particularly young people, that other forms of communication might

The power of this strategy became clear in 2011, when a devastating

earthquake

in

Haiti

consumed

all

major

social media platforms. In the two days following the tragedy, 82% of all news links on Twitter were about Haiti. Support for the victims was tremendous, but no organisation

was

more

integral

than

The

Red

Cross,

which has nearly $3 billion in annual expenses and is currently the second largest charity in the world. The organisation was mentioned in over a million Tweets, and blanketed social media with gut-wrenching photos of destroyed homes and crying children. That campaign attracted

3

million

unique

mobile

donors,

and

was

a

‘tipping point’ for philanthropy via social media.

miss. But it also allows donors to feel good about their purported altruism when they may have had no impact

Some

at all.

more

individuals on

rigor

and

than

organisations, emotion.

meanwhile,

Social

media

focus

and

the

internet have also helped these groups, by facilitating previously analysis.

impossible Fifty

effectiveness

knowledge

years

of

ago,

charities

accumulation

comparing

and

causes

and

the

cost

would

have

required immense effort; now all it takes is a Google search.

One organisation which has embraced this strategy is GiveDirectly, the charity favoured by Dorsey, Buterin and other tech entrepreneurs. The charity’s 2014 blog post titled ‘Why so few stories’, elaborates on this approach.

It notes that while some may view the lack of images and

stories

of

recipients

on

their

website

and

social

media as evidence they’ve ‘missed the marketing boat’, GiveDirectly makes clear its goal isn’t to highlight the most

heart-rending

stories,

but

rather

to

‘anchor

[its

philanthropy] in data and rigorous evidence… [so as not to] create a misleading picture of how the organisation uses donors’ dollars and the impact they ultimately have’

17

GiveDirectly is at the forefront of the effective altruism movement, pioneered by bioethicist Peter Singer and philosopher understand

William how

MacAskill,

people

can

which

best

help

seeks

to

others.

Its

utilitarian logic is simple: everyone has finite amounts of time and resources, so people should choose charities wisely to maximise the amount of good they can do. As such, much of the movement’s energy is spent analysing which causes are the most cost effective– direct cash transfers, malaria nets and vitamin supplements are top choices – and which are not (guide dogs for the blind and cows for the poor). Founded in the late 2000s, effective altruism’s influence has continued to spread, with donations to movement supported causes growing more than 20% annually since 2015.

Effective altruist interventions are generally simple and non-invasive, to minimise administrative bloat and the potential for failure. They’re also more easily facilitated by digitisation; GiveDirectly, for example, has historically delivered While

cash

digitally

problems

can

and

arise–

is

now

such

fully

as

contactless.

‘cost-effective’

Charitable giving and solicitation will persist on social media, with development officers and donors seeking to maximise

online

prioritising

interest.

reactionary

Gifts

short

will

term

come

in

waves,

catastrophes

over

consistent, development-focused philanthropy.

malaria nets being repurposed by recipients as fishing nets – they are relatively rare and small scale. When less targeted aid appeals go wrong, results are much more shocking; think Haiti, where the Red Cross’ $500 million in donations culminated in just 6 new homes being built.

In April 2020, GiveDirectly launched their first ever U.S. cash assistance program in response to growing need and demand to support U.S. citizens impacted during COVID-19. Despite the deviation from its core mission of helping those in extreme poverty, the program was a

Charitable before

scandals

Facebook

and

and

implosions

Twitter,

and

were

they’re

plentiful

unlikely

to

massive success, delivering one time payments of $1,000 to more than 178,000 Americans. Additionally, their U.S.

ever go away. But the Red Cross’s failure is a uniquely

programs helped make 2021 their best fundraising year

21st century phenomenon, perhaps made possible only

ever, with a record $140 million going to international

through

recipients.

incident

social

media.

causes

individuals

and

an

The

plotline

outpouring

organisations

of

that

is

simple:

support, are

a

viral

flooding

incapable

of

GiveDirectly plans on continuing their work in the U.S.

managing the torrent of hashtags and dollars. Intense

and

focus

recipients on their website and social media. Last year

is

followed

by

complete

disinterest,

leaving

have

recently

begun

to

feature

stories

from

organisations unscrutinised and with a lack of funding.

they

The underlying problem goes unaddressed or unsolved,

engineers directly from Google, who are building tools

perhaps with a plaster slapped on to appease casual

to

onlookers. Rinse and repeat.

media.

hired

a

acquire

product

and

Asked

retain about

team,

complete

donors, these

mostly

with

software

through

changes,

social

Anna

Cerf,

GiveDirectly’s growth manager, said the organisation is

The rise of effective altruism, however, proves this isn’t

trying

the only possibility. Meticulous analytical giving is here

recipient, ‘but in a way that doesn’t fall into plenty of

to stay, along with trending causes and chic solutions.

to

create

a

connection

between

donor

and

hornet’s nests we want to avoid… we built the product with recipients’ input’. The result will almost certainly be

Moreover, having learned from the nonprofit industry’s history of failure and ineffectiveness in affecting major societal changes, more philanthropic efforts will target smaller, manageable problems.

more money in the pockets of recipients, aided by those platforms

who

facilitate

the

type

of

philanthropy

effective altruism staunchly opposes. To understand the future of international development, one must follow the clicks.

18

An Illusion of Equity:

The Neo-Colonial Politics of Technocratic Development Aid in Africa A brief history of how efforts to progress technological advancement across Africa have been utilized both by former colonial nations, and now international development institutions, to reinvigorate imperial empire building, driving poverty and inequality.

by RACHEL BECK & ASHA JAFFA In

the

small

malaria

African

the

nation

leading

of

cause

Guinea-Bissau,

of

death

among

While such benevolent initiatives with technology driven solutions leave us inspired and hopeful for the future,

pregnant women and children under five. A team of

they

public

development

according to the World Health Organization, from 2007

technocrats from the World Bank, the United Nations

to 2018 an average of USD $600 million per year was

Development Programme (UNDP), the Global Fund, and

spent globally on research and product development for

the national government partnered on an initiative to

malaria.

introduce

world’s

health

provided

a

professionals

new

tablets

mobile

with

and

technology.

digitized

The

reporting

project

systems

to

also

obscure

In

the

bigger

comparison,

largest

in

picture.

2018

pharmaceutical

alone, giants,

For

example,

three Pfizer,

of

the

Merck,

and Johnson & Johnson, were projected to spend close

Guinea-Bissau’s public health facilities to enhance real-

to

time reporting of national public health data, provide

erectile dysfunction pills, approximately fifty times more

earlier

than

identification

communities,

19

West

remains

and

of

malaria

administer

outbreaks

in rural

what

is

on

spent

research

on

and

malaria

development

each

year

for

globally.

equipped medical responses. Notably, this project has

urgently needed is the reallocation of resources away

strengthened

from

health

and

billion

Technology alone is not the solution to end malaria;

public

timely

30

better

national

more

USD

data

and

corporate

contributed to an estimated sixteen percent reduction

sustainable,

in

initiatives.

malaria-related

deaths

from

2017 - 2018.

profiteering

inclusive

and

and

reinvestment

accessible

public

in

health

Widespread

privatization

throughout

Africa

was,

and

largely remains, based on a neoliberal economic policy Innovations

in

technology

are

increasingly

becoming

of

attracting

presented as solutions to global inequalities, such as

transmission

improving

knowledge

access

to

adequate

healthcare

services

foreign of

from

investment

to

manufacturing successful

encourage

and

the

technological

multinational

corporations

COVID-19

(MNCs) to local industries, improving their efficiency and

pandemic has reminded us, equity is often an illusion.

outputs. The result, however, has been the continued

With the pandemic now surpassing the two year mark,

plundering of wealth across Africa. In 2015, while the

forty new billionaires have emerged, all with fortunes

continent of Africa received USD $162 billion in the form

made

of loans, aid and personal remittances, USD $203 billion

throughout

the

off

Global

South.

COVID-19

Meanwhile,

Yet,

vaccines

patent

and

as

the

and

medications.

copyright

monopolies

was

removed

condensed in wealthy Western nations have structurally

evasion

prevented

profits

universal

access

to

the

essential

vaccine.

by or

from

the

continent

multinational

by

costs

either

corporations

imposed

on

African

through

tax

repatriating nations

to

Rather than release the information and technologies,

combat climate change. Put simply, more wealth - over

big

USD $40 billion in 2015 - is being extracted from Africa

pharma

has

withheld

such

critical

information

to

again prioritize profits over people. Many countries in

than is provided through aid.

the Global South are reliant on the will of rich nations to donate

and

disperse

the

vaccine,

a

dynamic

which

According

to

the

late

Nobel

Laureate

and

Kenyan

many scholars have called the global medical apartheid

national, Dr. Wangari Maathai, in her 2009 book The

system.

Challenge

for

Africa,

the

SAPs

strategically

‘forced

governments to slash budgets for health, education, and As explained by Zambian national Dr. Dambisa Moyo in

other essential services for their citizens’, while aiding

her

aid-

economic imperialism. For example, in Zambia, the IMF

functioning

aided the transfer of the national copper mines into the

Africa, managed by Africans, for Africans, what is left is

hands of Glencore, a Swiss corporation. Zambia has the

one where outsiders attempt to map its destiny and call

third

the shots’. As Dr. Moyo notes, between 1970 and 1998, as

percent of the population lives on less than USD $1 a

aid flows to Africa reached all-time highs, economic

day

growth

Glencore maintains a yearly turnover of more than USD

2009

book

dependency

is

rates

Dead

that

Aid,

‘the

instead

declined

of

across

net

result

having

the

a

continent,

of

and

the

largest

and

80

copper

percent

reserves

are

in

the

world,

unemployed;

yet

60

meanwhile,

$180 billion, more than eight times the gross national

poverty rate rose from 11 per cent to 66 per cent.

product (GNP) of Zambia.

Aid dependency in Africa is actively enforced by the neoliberal international financial institutions (IFIs) which has led to massive economic repercussions. From the late

1970s

Adjustment

and

throughout

Programmes

the

(SAPs)

led

1990s, by

Structural

the

IFIs,

in

particular the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), were advertised as the solution to Africa’s underdevelopment. Yet they may in fact be the cause.

In the 1980s, while IMF and World Bank loans to Africa were dramatically increased, national ownership over African industries fell from 90 per cent to 10 per cent in just six years, shifting power away from the state and into

the

hands

foreign

multinationals.

Neoliberal

conditionalities attached to the IFI’s development loans required both the privatization of nationalized industries and implementation of severe austerity measures which cut

government

spending

on

social

services.

... more wealth - over USD $40 billion in 2015 - is being extracted from Africa than is provided through aid.

The

justification? Technological advancement.

20

While African nations have paid back the same amount

Draconian austerity to soft power actions of humanitarian

of

welfarism characterized as “development”. The end goal

loan

debt

they

hundreds

of

billions

profound

consequences

services. been

For

borrowed, are

example,

paying

around

due

still on

in

owed the

interest

which

the

times

rates

has

provision

Nigeria

fifteen

to

of

had

social

government

as

much

on

has

of

imperial

exploitation

remained

steadfast:

colonial

development projects were intended to quell dissent while maintaining European economic domination.

loan

repayments yearly than it has invested in public health

Core to the colonial development agenda was a horde of

services,

mostly

a

dynamic

academics

entrenched

colonial

power

have

described

relations.

Rather

as

than

white

upper-class

Western-educated

elites

mobilized as a civilizing force to control underclass “slum-

slashing the debt in order that African nations can free

dwelling”

up resources to properly invest in public health, the World

assimilation

Bank

core

viewed Black Africans as unruly and unintelligent, thus in

institutions for international development, including the

need of “civilizing”. The poverty and “slums” that were

IFIs and United Nations (UN), were built upon an ideology

produced and proliferated by colonialism were viewed by

of

European

offers

tablets

respecting

and

national

expects

applause.

sovereignty,

yet

The

enable

and

African

populations

and

welfare

ruling

elites

through

policies.

not

as

the

forced

cultural

European

settlers

result

of

colonial

encourage neocolonial systems of control of Africa by

deprivation and exploitation, but rather the product of

outside

hereditary

corporations

and

governments

who

reap

curable

criminally large profits.

underclass

through

behavior

European

viewed

systems

of

as

potentially

education

and

wage labour.

The global system of development aid is one historically designed

to

produce

and

sustain

global

inequality,

Therefore,

exclusion

of

disadvantaged

populations

from participating in development processes as leaders

nations. We must understand colonialism, in the words of

was

Patrick Wolfe, as not an event but a structure, and one

Bertocchi

that

‘legitimized’ because ‘it promoted the integration of the

development

aid

frameworks

have

inherited

and

considered and

(2002),

the

post-colonial

rule

by

been

channelled

the

no longer [work for the colonial administration] the next

embraced the same colonial modernizing ambitions, and

best thing is to be working for the development of Kenya

was intended to be something imposed on Africa with

in the development field—after all it is the same thing’.

both imperial and humanitarian intentions.

Colonialism was legitimized through its overarching aim

Neocolonialism

to

leading

modernize

and

integrate

the

“backwards”

prioritization

system

predominantly

a

highly

profitable

enterprise

for

European

presently

development

African continent into the Western capitalist economic -

Correspondingly,

system,

had

scholar Dr. Uma Kothari (2005), ‘I thought, right if I can

forcibly

colonies’.

economic

elaborated

foreign capital and fostered a modernization process in

by

world

As

colonial

colonies

interviewed

the

imperative.

ex-colonial

officer

into

an

Canova

embodied. As exemplified by the statement of one British

of

remains

institutions,

development

of

higher

development

structural upheld

among through

had

the the

“experts”

who

are

socio-economic

class

and

metropoles and their industries. The colonial project in its

educated in elite Western universities - technocrats who,

simplest

extract

as described by Dr. Kothari (2005), ‘embody the unequal

natural resources and maintain access to cheap labour

relationship between the “First” and “Third” Worlds’. As

and therefore cheaply manufactured primary products,

these highly paid technocrats understand well, poverty is

forming

profitable and development is an industry. The World Bank

form

had

several

dependencies

and

core

objectives:

inequitable

to

trade

relations

between the former colonies and colonial states.

and IMF continue to operate on a ‘one-dollar, one-vote system’

With

21

the

further widening the divide between wealthy and poor

a

growing

number

of

successful

anti-colonial

such

which

has

institutions, of

maintained as

both

the

Western

U.S.

IFIs

over

largest

shareholder

continent, erosion of colonial control instigated fears of

“gentleman’s

European economic collapse: colonial processes were in

structure that appoints only European nationals as IMF

dire need of rebranding. Colonial regimes attempted to

managing director, and only US nationals as World Bank

change their behavior from hard power actions of

president.

a

has

the

uprisings occurring both outside and within the African

agreement”,

and

hegemony

remains

reinforced

discriminatory

the

governance

Across Africa, whether the need is

Figure 2: Percentage of Staff with Geographical Status at Senior Levels by Nationality: Composition of the United Nations Secretariat, 1999-2020

for

60

healthy

education,

food,

equitable

inclusive

housing,

free

health care, increased accessibility 50

to

transportation

telecommunication 40

national whole,

30

economic modern

and

services, growth

or

as

technology

a

will

continue to play a contributing role.

Technology

20

has

efficiency

of

enhanced

resource

the

utilization,

spurred the creation and expansion 10

of

resources,

reliance 0

diminished

natural

a

factor

endowment in economic progress -

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Western European & Other States*

and

on

African States

contributions

which

should

not

be

diminished.

After WWII, the “problem of poverty” rose to the forefront of foreign policy agendas.

As

explained

by

the

Colombian

post-development

scholar

Dr.

Arturo Escobar, the ‘“discovery”’ of poverty in the “third world” was, and remains, highly political. As Dr. Escobar (2011) contends, poverty became ‘the anchor’ of a global restructuring led by the West to propagate an allencompassing Eurocentric view of modernity and free-market capitalism framed as “progress”: ‘the treatment of poverty allowed society to conquer new domains’.

However,

access

technologies

often

to

such

comes

with

strings attached and to the benefit of

foreign

pockets.

international

Institutions

development,

especially

the

neoliberal

World

neocolonial Bank,

IMF,

for

most and World

Trade Organization (WTO), and the A recent study in Accra, Ghana, details how the government views the urban poor as a threat to technological advancements and modernisation efforts, which has contributed to forced government displacement of the urban poor who are disproportionately criminalised to legitimise their structural exclusion - an inherited British colonial apartheid system. As advanced by Dr.

Tom

Gillespie,

the

Ghanaian

government

has

advanced

gentrifying

endeavours to “beautify” Accra in order to attract foreign investment and entrepreneurship

to

the

Ghanaian

capital.

In

this

way,

tech-oriented

development frameworks have not widely benefited the urban poor, but

UN,

are

alltogether. efforts

are

strengthen

dire

need

or Unless

made

to

of

dissolution concerted create

African

and

scientific

advancements under the leadership of

local,

indigenous,

and

marginalized populations, any hope for a rapid and internally stimulated development

instead worsened their exclusion and dispossession.

in

decolonisation

of

African

countries

will remain a mere illusion.

Technology alone is not a solution; rather, it is often a distraction from the structural inequalities progressed and upheld by neocolonial development aid

institutions.

equity.

After

disadvantaged

Digitisation

in

development

interviewing

a

dozen

community

in

Nairobi,

UN

has

field

Kenya,

enabled workers

one

the

illusion

of

from

Kibera,

a

conclusion

remained

certain: grassroots ownership of development processes is almost entirely absent. Digitisation has allowed development technocrats to take staged photos presenting the appearance of collaboration, while in reality, the transition from the field to the computer has far removed technocrats from the grassroots. Technocrats have become further disengaged from what our interviewees

defined

as

the

most

important

factor

in

the

of international development: grassroots leadership and ownership.

success

Poverty should not be for-profit.

More than tablets, Africans deserve justice.

22

Decrypting the Digital Fortress: Refugees’ experiences at borders are changing in the wake of new technologies. But is this technology helping to ensure their safety or does it simply encapsulate an ‘inhuman(e)’ approach to border control?

by YASMIN TURNER

In

the

post-pandemic

climate,

international

travel

is

beginning to regain a sense of normality. For countries with access

to

COVID-19

vaccines,

the

world

we

have

anticipated for the last couple of years is finally becoming a reality again.

Yet, borders are not opening up for everyone in the postpandemic world. In fact, many borders are being reinforced digitally

to

entering

Europe:

Europe

is

prevent

a

certain

group

undocumented

erecting

a

digital

of

travellers

refugees

fortress,

and

from

migrants.

envisioning

a

21st

century battle scene, to stop a “migrant invasion”: delivering sound

cannons

as

warning

shots

and

fitting

observation

towers with long-range cameras, night vision and multiple sensors, like a lookout bunker.

Wars,

conflict,

persecution

and

economic

turmoil

have

forced more people to flee their homes now than at any time since the end of World War II, with 82.4 million forcibly displaced people worldwide at the end of 2020, according to

the

UN

escalating

Refugee issues

Agency,

further.

and

The

UN

the

COVID-19

‘Refugee

crisis

is

Convention’,

signed in 1951, certifying a common understanding among European

nations

that

those

fleeing

persecution

require

international protection and that there is a responsibility to provide a safe haven, seems to be forgotten. With 86% of refugees being hosted in developing countries by the end of

2020,

and

of

this

figure

73%

living

in

countries

neighbouring their countries of origin, the cause for concern around

a

“migrant

invasion”

in

Europe

was

inaccurate,

fuelled by images and news headlines that were, arguably, a main cause behind Brexit and the “take back control of our borders” campaign led by the Conservative party.

Digitisation forms a large part of “taking back control of our borders” here in the UK, but is a technique used across Europe too, with a report by Al Jazeera claiming the EU has spent

€3

billion on security tech research in the last five

years to digitally strengthen the robust physical borders and processes already in place.

23

Technology has discriminatory impact on refugees and migrants before they even reach European borders, as police and governing bodies favour gadgetry, such as drones, over policing that involves the human interaction which

could

physically

support

those

in

need.

For

example, in the EU, the increased funding given to EU coast

guard

and

border

agency,

Frontex,

is

being

channelled into surveillance drones that watch migrants in distress, instead of supplying patrol ships capable of giving aid. In the UK, the home secretary Priti Patel has called on France and the rest of the European Union to ensure

migrants

do

not

try

to

sail

to

the

UK:

enter

drones. whose There are reports by multiple media outlets,confirmed by a European Parliament report in 2021, of Frontex using this

surveillance

technology

to

overlook

illegal

pushbacks of migrants before they can apply for asylum.

In the most extreme cases, thousands of migrants are reportedly being taken into custody by the Libyan coast guard, before returning to inhumane detention camps in post-Gaddafi Libya. There, it is widely known that many have

suffered

report

in

July

torture, by

starvation

Amnesty

and

death,

International

with

exposing

a

the

sexual abuse and beatings taking place.

previous

chances

of

trauma

displaying

significantly

these

exact

increases

signals

and

their is

a

problematic process to force upon victims of war and turmoil,

immediately

According

to

Alex

marking

Najibi,

a

those

as

5th-year

suspects.

Ph.D.

student

studying bioengineering at Harvard University, there is evidence that racial stereotypes are embedded within facial

recognition

software,

raising

further

questions

about its efficiency, especially since its accuracy rate of 75%, tested in a study by the researchers in Manchester, had a participant group using “fewer Asian or Arabic participants than white Europeans, and fewer women than men.”

Beyond surveillance, one of the most recent additions to digital border technology includes relying on artificial intelligence

programs

to

screen

people

before

they

arrive at the border, after the EU trialled an artificialintelligence

driven

lie

detector

test,

iBorderCtrl,

Greece, Latvia and Hungary in 2019 as part of a million

EU-funded

challenges

research

travellers

with

an

project.

The

animated

in

€4.5

program

border

guard

who asks them a series of questions, via a webcam, while

Al

software

analyses

their

“micro

gestures”

to

determine whether the interviewee is lying.

The data received by this increased technology also poses a privacy risk and can result in deportation. In recent years, concerns over data protection have grown rapidly amongst civilians in the UK and Europe. Data sharing

is

an

additional

risk

for

marginalised

groups

such as migrants and refugees, with the biometric data putting them in greater danger of having their personal data used against them. This is especially an issue with data, such as that obtained from the European Border Surveillance System, which is taken completely without their knowledge.

The lie detector test system was developed in the UK by researchers at Manchester Metropolitan University and was

devised

to

help

prevent

crime

and

terrorism

by

categorising travellers into high and low risk before they reach

the

border.

However,the

technology

has

been

found to produce false positives and is described by experts as “pseudoscience”.

Beyond Europe, it was revealed in June by Human Rights Watch

that

the

UN

High

Commissioner

for

Refugees

shared personal information taken from ethnic Rohingya refugees

in

government, refugees.

Bangladesh without

the

Bangladesh

with informed

proceeded

the

Bangladesh

consent to

of

share

the the

information with Myanmar, the very country the refugees This

technology,

subtle

facial

which

reads

movements,

or

signs

of

fidgeting

stress as

a

through sign

dishonesty, poses a risk for migrants and refugees

of

had

fled

from,

with

over

100,000

Rohingya

fleeing

persecution since 2016, to verify possible refugees for repatriation.

24

#refugeeswelcome #LadyCilento

#LetThemStay

#heathasylum

#refugeeswelcome

Increased use of technological devices is saving lives, as was perfectly demonstrated by seven-year-old Afghan boy Ahmed in April 2016. Ahmed saved himself and 14 adults by sending a text saying he was suffocating in a

#LadyCilento

children at camps to help keep them safe. The police

#LetThemStay

tracked the phone to a location on the M1 in Leicester

Digitisation can have a life-changing effect on many

and

and is essential in most cases to increasing the chance

sealed

lorry,

Refugees,

a

using

a

charity

managed

to

phone

in

Calais

save

all

15

given who

of

to

him

gives

them

by

Help

phones

in

a

to

human

#refugeeswelcome

trafficking container. A phone has meant life or death

of

for many.

overall, Europe and beyond seems to be losing its moral

refugees

and

migrants

finding

safety.

However,

compass, allowing or even aiding thousands of deaths For others, free messaging apps such as WhatsApp and

at sea and elsewhere, just 70 years after they stood in

Facebook

solidarity at the UN ‘Refugee Convention’ and promised

have

allowed

refugees

to

communicate

without a cellular network. Humanitarian aid workers or

safety to those in need.

relatives waiting for them in the new host country can be contacted with ease, helping to facilitate efforts at

The digital fortress erected doesn’t seem to be yielding

finding safety.

any time soon, with laws regarding who and how people can enter countries becoming stricter. In particular, Priti

In addition, social media platforms can be utilised as

Patel’s controversial new Nationality and Borders Bill in

platforms for solidarity, connecting people globally and

the

assisting

fundamental human rights, criminalising those forced to

with

efforts

to

help

refugees

find

safety.

Hashtags are important in spreading the message, for

UK

puts

asylum

under

threat

and

violates

many

flee.

example #refugeeswelcome, which put public pressure on governments such as the UK to take action.

But

whilst

nearing

measures with

are

increasing

surveillance

at

drones

sea

and

and

other

One case of support across social media that stands

techniques,

out

hope of dismantling them for more humane and fair

was

the

use

of

hashtags

#LetThemStay

and

#LadyCilento by doctors and nurses at Brisbane’s Lady Cilento

hospital,

which

were

then

taken

up

by

digital

borders

are

being

tackled

in

the

border policies.

the

general public back in February 2016. The medical staff

The Border Violence Monitoring Network tracks illegal

stood by their duty of care, unwilling to discharge a

pushbacks,

police

child to an offshore processing centre well known for

abuses

European

child abuse, sexual abuse, malnutrition and a lack of

reports act as a critical tool for accountability for the

access to basic human rights. Under the hashtags, tens

violence at the borders. Additionally, there are groups

of

such

thousands

of

people

showed

their

support

and

as

by

Abolish

violence

and

member

Frontex,

other

states.

which

human Their

advocate

rights

monthly

for

the

protestors were given pizza from the general public. The

abolishment of the EU’s border agency that reinforces

doctors and nurses won their case in Brisbane, after

the

thousands

racist

joined

their

unbroken

10-day

vigil.

The

border and

regime

that

reinforces

is,

in

colonial

their and

belief,

‘inherently

capitalistic

power

community was also noticed by prominent figures such

structures’. Instead, they are calling for a policy that

as the Chief of the Australian Medical Association, who

revolves around migrant safety and free movement, and

took action by using #healthasylum, a forum for refugee

a task force that can fulfil this.

healthcare.

25

strict

borders,

organisations involved in the immigration process have control

of

allowed

what

to

applications denied

digital

refuse and

and

data

data

immigration

applicants

is

access

were

used

and are

requests.

visas unable

Asylum

were to

being

access

the

records used in their cases. With the new court ruling, applicants

can

now

decide

which

of

their

data

and

records are used and can insist on more transparency and accountability from the Home Office in its decision process.

Court decisions are challenging certain aspects of the impacts

of

digitisation

on

refugees

as

we

approach

2022, but there is still significant work to be done, and A

transparency

lawsuit

against

the

EU’s

Research

it

cannot

be

said

that

borders

will

not

just

become

Executive Agency, seeking the release of the ethical

stricter

evaluation, legal admissibility, marketing and results of

migration

the Al lie detector, iBorderCtrl, was filed in March 2019

refugees

by

Party

population at the end of 2018, according to the United

has

Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, there really is

Patrick

Germany

Breyer. and

successfully

a

sued

Breyer civil the

is

MEP

of

liberties

the

Pirate

activist

Commission

who

previously

over

a

refusal to disclose documents.

no

each

cause

year

central

with

concerns

constituting

for

terrorism,

concern

just

to

to

pandemics

every

0.26%

citizens

of

nation.

the

and

UK’s

the

and With total

“migrant

invasion” narrative must be stopped in order for hostile migration

The publicly funded Al lie detector test is yet to be

policies

to

change

course,

digitally

and

overall.

implemented in the UK. Back in 2019, Home Office said it is not considering using lie detectors in asylum cases, but with calls from the former chief of UK immigration enforcement urging the Home Office to get on board, and with the digitisation of borders continually on the rise, it might only be a matter of time.

As

well

as

the

work

carried

out

by

activists

and

advocacy groups, there are promising legal challenges being won in European courts. In May this year, Open Rights Group and campaign organisation the 3 million won

a

legal

exemption” to Under

this

battle

challenging

the UK’s

2018

exemption, the

Data

the

“immigration

Protection

Act.

Home Office and other

"With refugees constituting just 0.26% of the UK’s total population at the end of 2018... there really is no cause for concern to citizens and the “migrant invasion” narrative must be stopped in order for hostile migration policies to change course"

26

Interviews

Biometrics in International Development An Interview with Sebastian Marhart @sebmanhart Sebastian Manhart is currently an Advisor on Digital Identity for the German Federal Chancellery. He spent six years as COO for SimPrints, the world's only non-profit biometrics company focused on unique identification in global health, and has worked in various advisory roles for the Digital Identity Alliance (ID2020) and the World Bank.

His academic background includes UCL, Cambridge and Harvard.

Maya Beney: So, Sebastian, could you give us a brief description of the role that you're currently in, and how your academic and professional career lead you to this position?

SM: Right now, I work as an independent consultant for governments on digitisation. My primary client is the German Federal Chancellery, which

is

essentially

obviously going

to

still

Angela

change

soon.

Merkel's I

also

office,

work

as

although an

that's

advisor,

for

example for the World Bank, where I advise governments on digital identity and digitisation. I've been an entrepreneur for my whole adult life and the start-up that has been the most successful is Simprints.

It's the world's only non-profit biometrics company. Leading that company for six years taught me a lot and gave me the opportunity to do the work I do now. In academics, I've always been very interested in national global development, and global health in particular. I would say Cambridge was a good place to study development because you get a very sceptical, cynical view of the sector, which is, I think, quite healthy when you start working in it.

SM: Biometrics is anything that proves who you are. Who you are is defined in two different ways: either behavioural or physiological. Physiological is the more common way we think about biometrics. For example, your face, your fingerprints, but also things like your ears or toes. Almost any part of your body is, to a certain extent, unique to you.

And so, it can be used to uniquely identify you. Then there's also behavioural biometrics, which is based more on how you act. This is used a bit less but it's up-and-coming and it can be things like the way you walk or the way you talk, not just your voice itself. These are all things that can identify you, and they have been used increasingly around the world, especially over the past 70 years. In development, the underlying challenge that we face is that we often work in difficult, hard to reach areas with very vulnerable, and often poor, populations that do not have any way to prove who they are. They're often not registered at birth and they don’t receive an identity document, whether it's a passport or a social security number. They don't have any health ID, and what happens is that if you're working in those areas and you're trying to deliver services (whether it's cash, health or education) it's very difficult to know if you’ve reached the right person. In healthcare, from the donor side, billions and billions of aid gets misallocated - lost or misused every year because of fraud. This can be tackled by having better data. But better data requires knowing who you're targeting and who you're reaching. You need to know who you're dealing with.

Biometrics is a very powerful way to do so. But again, it also has downsides, so it has to be used carefully.

27

MB: Where do you find the most resistance when it comes to using technology? Where do some of the loudest voices against this technology come from?

SM: Honestly, you get resistance at all levels. Let's start with the most important, which is the beneficiary or the client. There's a lot of justified resistance there. People are giving away very sensitive information. People might have preconceived notions, and might have had bad experiences with biometrics, so there's resistance. Then, also, for the people who are operating the technology - because often you know it's not the beneficiaries themselves. It's a health worker or a frontline worker and they are already overburdened across the world. Constantly given the next intervention, the next technology, and to them this is usually just an annoyance. It's yet another thing they have to carry with them, charge at night, and it adds time to their already compressed and busy day. Creating the right incentives for frontline workers, for them to use this technology is very important. And then, similarly, if we move up the chain to the programme level, there can be resistance. Again, any new technology you introduce involves new complexity and unknowns. And as you get to the director level, even government level; there's a lot of resistance to what this technology can do. This technology can shed light on what everyone knows is happening, by which I mean, fraud. But nobody wants to acknowledge or see this. And, so, you have a lot of individuals who have vested interests against better data, cleaner data, more transparency. And these people will find all sorts of excuses to prevent technology from being introduced that they know will make their lives harder. The only thing I’ve seen to the contrary are donors; they are spending billions, they're terrified of the Daily Mail writing the next headline about the misuse of

funds,

and

they

want

to

ensure

value

for

money.

They

love

things

that

can

increase

transparency

and

accountability in their programmes.

MB: And as part of your role as an independent consultant, are you involved in trying to challenge the resistance of governments towards this technology?

SM:

It’s

strange

because

when

I

was

at

Simprints,

I

was

obviously trying to convince governments, and anyone under the sun really, that in many situations, this was a helpful tool a helpful technology. Now, that's not really my goal anymore.

My goal is to help governments with whatever they think is best.

I'll

give

you

an

example.

France

is

the

strongest

opponent of biometrics I've encountered anywhere in the world. They've got some biometrics for a passport but in general they are forbidden, even in the government. And I spoke to their Privacy Commissioner, and they had a half hour rant about how biometrics is an awful idea and how they'd rather have fraud and duplicates in their database than use biometrics, to ensure that their citizens enjoy their privacy rights. I thought that was quite powerful. This is an advanced

economy

that

has

the

means

to

implement

biometrics, probably in an ethical way. But even they were like, ‘absolutely no’, we're never going to do this. And, so, my job now, is not to convince them that they should do it, but to figure out within the parameters of what they need and what they want, what are the best solutions. And biometrics is not the only way. There are many ways to solve this problem, it just happens that biometrics is, I would say, almost a shortcut that allows you to do things very effectively. But, again, it comes with downsides. It's not always the right idea.

28

MB: It's really interesting to hear you mentioned France because, philosophically, they have quite a strong tradition against that kind of power being invasive. It’s interesting to see that playing out in reality.

SM: Absolutely, I would say it's really important to understand the historical cultural context of the country but also what civil society is like in the societies; how much can they hold the government accountable? India is a good example. They introduced by far the biggest biometrics programme in human history. But they've got a very strong civil society, and they've got activists, banging on the door of the Supreme Court, all the time, to keep the programme in balance, to keep improving it. And that's been absolutely instrumental in making sure that the programme sticks within certain parameters of privacy rights. But then you have China, and you have the second biggest

biometric

programme

in

the

world.

And

they

take

people’s

facial

biometrics,

anywhere

you

go,

it's

connected to your social index score that allows you to do anything, from marrying to taking a train. That is the exact opposite of what happens when you don't have civil society holding you accountable. I think when it comes to biometrics, you really have to think, especially when it’s government-implemented, in what environment and what context is it being implemented, and who's going to hold the government accountable to that programme? And that's something that I'm really interested in because it makes such a difference in citizens’ lives.

MB: I'm interested in how you mentioned that China is taking biometrics without consent. Could you elaborate on that a little bit please?

SM:

China

has

CCTV

cameras

all

across

the

country,

with

the

most

sophisticated facial biometrics you can imagine. They can recognise your face at

hundreds

of

metres

of

distance

and

profile

you

with

that.

It’s

really

overwhelming. It's crazy. And then they connect that with thousands and tens of thousands of other data points. So anytime they track who you see, what transport you take, where you hang out, and what you buy, and doing that they create a social index score, so every citizen in China has an index that can go up or down, depending on your activities and the tracking. If it's high, you get benefits: you get government subsidies, you get access to certain educational and professional opportunities. It's pretty much the same story as the Black Mirror episode, but this is literally happening. If your score goes down, you're excluded

from

things,

so

you're

excluded

from

work

and

educational

opportunities, and it's worse, you're not even allowed to take public transport anymore. And a lot of these index posts are public. And the index score is one thing

that

facial

biometrics

is

used

for,

to

link

data

to

the

right

index

accurately over time.

MB: I’d like to come back to something you said about Biometrics being used by frontline organisations, like the UNHCR, and by frontline workers. How did the COVID pandemic impact the ways in which biometrics were taken for people in frontline areas?

SM: I would say the biggest initial difference was that a lot of biometrics is based on physical contact. Like most biometrics, you have to place some part of your body on something. And with COVID-19 that became a vector of transmission, so a lot of these methods couldn't be used anymore. That was a very practical change and that led to a huge spurt of innovation in the sector towards contactless modalities. That's why facial biometrics has really picked up pace, because you can do it at a distance, which is safer for the frontline worker.

29

More generally, for the whole development sector, there's obviously been a huge slowdown in routine service delivery. We've seen a massive decrease globally in all development

programmes,

we've

seen

massive

cuts.

Think

about

the

FDCO

(Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office), which cut their IT budget by 30% and has seen hundreds of programmes stopping - that has a repercussion on the use of biometrics too. Having said that, biometrics is very much up-and-coming and it’s increasingly seen as an innovation that you have to build into proposals to win money from donors. And so, despite cuts, biometrics might have been affected less than other areas of development.

MB: Where does your own passion for biometrics come from, how did you become interested in this?

SM: I have no passion for biometrics, and to be very honest, I’ve always seen biometrics as a means to an end. We didn't start Simprints with biometrics, we started

Simprints

by

acknowledging

that

there's

a

problem

with

the

lack

of

transparency in global development. And then we started digging deeper: how can we solve that? Through better data. How do we get better data? Through unique identification. But nobody in Simprints - literally nobody - loves biometrics. We all do it because it's a means to an end. So, my passion is very much for ensuring that the scarce resources we have available go to the right people at the right services, and I am a big fan of trying to see where we can use technology to achieve that.

MB: And across the various roles and organisations that you've worked with, what stories of biometrics being successfully implemented have stuck with you?

SM: I would say that the best used case that I've come across is actually in clinical studies. We've worked with a lot of universities like Liverpool or the London School of Tropical Medicine. And these organisations do a lot of extremely important research on, for example, how can we improve HIV, or TB programmes. And they

do

this,

they

need

to

create

when

different study cohorts. Very often these

need to be randomised as well, and keeping data separate, making sure that you're always keeping the same individual in the same study cohort, is extremely important for the cleanness of the data and, therefore, for the results. A couple of these organisations said that biometrics improved their ability to conduct clean studies. For me, that was beautiful because you could really see the difference that the use of biometrics has made. But biomedical technology is always an enhancer of underlying dynamics. You cannot, if a programme is messy and not working, introduce the technology, it's only going to get worse. This is a common problem I have with technologists; they think that they can solve societal problems with technology.

At a bigger level, I think what sticks with me is the work we did with BRAC, the world's biggest NGO, founded by Bangladeshis. We did our programming with an intervention of their health programme. It was a child and maternity health programme and we did an independent study that was led by a third party. It looked at the impact of using biometrics in a group of 22,000 women. And it was incredible. One change was there was a 38% increase in antenatal care visits in the cohort that used biometrics and an 18% increase in post-natal care visits. What this means, if you elaborate this to a national scale, is that tens or hundreds of thousands of pregnant women will receive essential visits that prevent maternal and child death. The best guess we have from our service was that health workers, when they use biometrics, were held more accountable, and knew that they couldn't cheat the system as much, and therefore they get to the visits that they are supposed to.

30

MB: Outside of the healthcare sector, in what sectors do you think biometrics will be implemented more over the next 10 years?

SM: A big one is cash. I mean the two biggest organisations that are using biometrics are WFP and UNHCR, and they use the main cash programmes. The more priced the service that you're delivering, the more fraud there will be. So, the more incentive to use biometrics to prevent fraud. In the humanitarian sphere, it is broadly picking up pace, for example, with the UNHCR. There's a lot of refugee registration, but that has had some controversies. I spoke about this five years ago because it was obvious that this was going to happen, and it happened earlier this year. Rohingya refugees were repatriated to Myanmar, with the Burmese government getting their biometrics from the UNHCR. And that is a well-known story now that has definitely dealt a blow to UNHCR’s efforts. Another example (not related to the UNHCR) is the recent Afghanistan example. Huge amounts of biometric databases were leaked that can be used to profile and target collaborators of the Western Allies. This will definitely slow down work in the humanitarian sector. The last few years have picked up a lot of pace but now I've also seen some strong reasons why biometrics, probably rightly, might be used less in the sector for the next few years.

MB: What do you think is new in terms of technology being used to take biometrics, and where should our readers look to, if they want to see this technology being implemented?

SM: In biometrics, historically, you had a human looking at a face and asking ‘what points of the face are most unique’, let's say the distance between the cheekbones, the distance between your eyes, the height of your nose, and then they would train algorithms on these features that humans had defined. What's happening now is that, instead, we give a machine learning algorithm a million faces, and we let the algorithm figure out itself what features are most reliable to match faces over time, biometrically. And we often have no clue what happens in that black box, we just see results. It's

significantly

better,

and

it

the will

data,

and

we

see

the

get more and more accurate

the more data you feed it. This is a huge movement we see, which again, opens a whole set of challenges when it comes to racial bias and algorithms, because what faces are available? Mainly the faces of white, western, usually male, celebrities on Google. But then these algorithms are used in Sub Saharan Africa and – surprise – they don't work. But we're seeing a lot of work on machine learning algorithms. So, I would say that's the biggest movement we're going to see. Secondly, you used to need additional hardware, but as phones get more powerful, we'll see more and more biometrics being transferred onto smartphones. You won't need additional hardware anymore, so potentially that cheap $50 smartphone might have the sensors that allow you to do all sorts of different biometrics, simply with the camera.

In terms of how to stay up to date – the main biometric kind of newsletter website is called ‘The Biometric Update’.

You can filter by development when searching. A bit closer to home is a newsletter called ‘ICTworks’ which covers all types of technology for development. And, then finally, is the UNHCR newsletter, and maybe WFP. UNHCR has a newsletter about their BIMS, which is their biometric identification system. They send the weekly newsletter about what they do. And other than that, it's mainly engaging with the kind of people who are leading the way. Simprints is a good example. They do a lot of thought leadership when it comes to biometrics for development. I think following that, and staying close to them, is probably the best way to stay up to date.

31

k of NGOs Digitisation in the work

An Interview with Rowena Luk @rowenaluk

Rowena Luk is the Global Head of Digital and Technology at Action Aid, an international charity working with women and girls living in poverty. She is also Chief Services Officer at Dimagi, an organisation delivering open and innovative technology to underserved communities globally, and the host of podcast series Aid Evolved, which tackles issues of poverty, technology and health.

MB: Could you tell us about your current role?

RL: Right now, I'm serving as the Head of Digital and Technology for ActionAid, which is a global Federation of 45 country offices. In my current role, I'm overseeing everything related to IT and digital applications across ActionAid’s work to lift communities out of poverty and to uphold human rights. Before that, I was Chief Services Officer at Dimagi where I led our services team, working hand in hand with communities and governments and non-profits, developing, delivering, and deploying applications to deliver better health care services.

MB: How did your professional and academic experience lead you to this?

RL: I studied engineering as an undergrad but decided I wasn't quite ready to dive in and join one of those big mega corporations, so instead I went to grad school for Information Systems at Berkeley in California. That's where I realised that there was actually a need for technology and for innovation everywhere, even in the aid sector, which is something I've always been passionate about. As a result of my experiences in grad school, I started to believe it was possible to have a career in this space – at the intersection of these two worlds. It’s a long story, but I kind of bounced away from research to start on my own non-profit. Through a series of fun events, I discovered Dimagi, an organisation that I absolutely fell in love with and knew I had to work with. I joined as an engineer but rose up the ranks until I got to Chief Services Officer and stayed within the organisation for 12 years. After that, I was looking for a space where I could serve an organisation that was based in the Global South, especially in South Africa, where I currently live and where my children were born. That's one of the things that brought me to Action Aid, which is quite recent – I only moved this year.

MB: That must have been quite a big transition, moving from California to South Africa. How did you find it, and how much of development work do you think nowadays can be done remotely, versus working in the area in which you’re helping?

RL: Great question. Well, most of my career, I've actually been bouncing around from location to location. I started in California, I went back to Canada, then to Massachusetts for Dimagi. Then I set up our West African country office and then ran our South African country office for Diamgi, before switching over to ActionAid. There are two aspects of the question; I think one aspect is working in Africa and the other aspect is living here. They've both beenincredible, eye-opening experiences for me, and I really do think it's essential and important to have the experience of making friends in these communities, understanding what a life here is like, what the constraints are and what the values and cultures are that shape everything. IThat said, with COVID-19 and over the past two years, everything has gone digital, and I do think that's a big step up, but there are also definite drawbacks. Now, any organisation that's working in development is working moreremotely. The most powerful impact of the switch to remote work is that it forces organisations to rely more on local actors.

32

Most organisations are now trying to shift lots of their funding towards a more local-led approach, then drawing on various different parts of the world for key technical expertise or other things, as needed. I think there's a lot of really positive things

happening

and

a

lot

of

doors

that

MB: What kind of projects are you working on at moment with ActionAid and AidEvolved, and what do you do on a day-to-day basis?

are

opening in terms of being able to create real

So the AidEvolved podcast is my evening and weekend

value remotely.

project. I am also a mother of two young kids, which is also an evening and weekends project of mine! These days my

MB: I'm wondering, for readers who are interested in a region but who don’t have a connection to it, how would you encourage them to forge links to, or understandings of, the culture?

full time day job is working with ActionAid and there I get involved with everything. So just to give you an example, I'm

overseeing

across

six

gather

data

parliament

this

countries and

about

digital we’re

to

advocate

issues

their

matter

them,

of

and

can only say so much, but when 10,000 young people come

university

is

really

it’s

impossible

for

the

platforms

to

the

–

collection

to

order to maximise their collective voice. One young person

stuff

data

to

members

doing your research, understanding the context, desk

and

to

project youth

leverage

the

media

that

engagement empowering

RL: I mean, there's one aspect of it which is just

history,

social

youth where

government

to

in

good for that. There's another aspect of really

together

feeling, experiencing and understanding – talking

Another aspect of my work is ensuring the security of the

ignore.

to

I

sensitive data that ActionAid handles. The organisation has

definitely recognise it can be hard to make those

an incredible portfolio of children and communities that

connections.

I

they sponsor around the world, providing education and

I

helping lift them out of poverty. To run that programme, we

space.

have information systems to track and see what's going on

There's many different approaches that different

with that child and how money is being used. It is really

people

important

the

people

struggled wasn’t

who

I

know

with

sure

when

how

take

live

to

understanding.

in

that

that's I

to

was

make

get

something in

grad

it

into

this

Definitely

environment.

school the

deeper go

that –

kind

through

of any

making

that

sure

we’re

that

we

modernising are

those

protecting

systems

those

and

vulnerable

networks that you have, like an uncle of a friend.

populations. We want to know we've done everything on

Also, try reaching out to organisations directly,

the digital side that we can to ensure that. The last piece

particularly ones that are on the ground. I think

of my work is supporting our advocacy and fundraising

it's

team, so that ActionAid has a global voice. It's a little mix

hard

to

go

through

the

many

layers

of

a

UNICEF or an Oxfam, but if there's a particular area that you want to work in, find some great organisations that are there and try to think of how you can provide value to them, and not just the other way around. If they're working on a

of everything and I definitely rely strongly on my team.

MB: How did Dimagi come to realise that there was a gap in the market, or a gap in aid work, for such an application?

humanitarian crisis, oftentimes the most valuable asset that they have is something that you can

RL: The Dimagi founder got into it from a public health

do,

consulting space. They had this image of putting together

even

if

it’s

just

publicity

or

fundraising

knowledge awareness. There are more immersive

data

experiences

and

having

large

medical

information

system

in

databases, like we have now for COVID-19. When he got

international development too; obviously in the

out into the field, he realised the issue was that the data

United States a lot of people get started in aid

doesn’t really exist in the first place. Everything is on paper,

through

and it

that

Peace

can

Corps

kickstart

and

I'm

a

sure

career

there

are

would

just

get

placed

on

a

shelf somewhere in

programmes like that in the UK too. Having an

the back room to gather dust. So, he shifted the focus of

immersive experience on the ground for a year or

the organisation to really focus on that first step: how do

two can set up your whole career in international

we get the data? How do we give access to information

development in a really positive way.

33

or

about people and, more importantly, give a voice to people in

places

where

they've

never

had

the

chance

before?

Maybe that smartphone in that community is the only twoway

connection

everything easily

that's

that

they

have

happening

available

which

with

online.

has

a

the

Today,

whole

internet, data

host

is

of

and more

positive

implications. And, I would say Dimagi has really led a lot of the evolution of the industry.

MB: In what areas of development, or regions of the world, do you see companies who work in these tech. spheres going in the future?

MB: What advice would you like to give to students who are interested in a career that involves both spheres of development and technology; perhaps more specifically, for women who are interested in entering the sphere as well? There's a lot of discourse currently on women in STEM but there's less on how women enter this more niche area of technology.

RL: What an interesting question. There is such a gap

of

technical

talent.

I've

met

lots

of

wonderfully talented technical people in this role RL: Today, development is focused on the lowest income

but there's so much good work that aid, and the

countries, a lot of that focus happens in Africa and in the

development

poorest

front. The reason that that gap exists is because

regions

of

India

and

China

as

well.

Those

are

the

at

by other engineers and this whole ecosystem of geeks talking about numbers to each other. I’m

we

there's

sure that’s also super fun, don't get me wrong,

going to be some role for technology to play to increase

but it takes a very special kind of person, who

the scale, the effectiveness or the reach of the programmes

really

that we have.

place, to dedicate their career and energy to

systems

and

programmes

Toyama

work

wrote,

the

Kentaro

to

technology is an amplifier of human intent. So as long as have

Dr.

want

technology

Google or Twitter. They want to be surrounded

As

programmers

the

a

global.

pure

on

going to be working in. And then on the technology side, is

of

needs

natural geographies that if you're in development, you're

potential

lot

sector,

in

place,

cares

about

making

the

world

a

better

this kind of work. There aren't enough of them in

MB: What is the most rewarding experience that you've had so far, working in the development sector?

the development sphere and the quest for talent is tough. But, if we can get more passionate young women leading the charge on how we

RL: I will say, and this is relevant to your audience, I really

can

cherished the early years that I was doing this kind of work.

welcome that. A lot of people – perhaps even

I mean, I know the work I do now is useful, or at least I hope

those working in the development sector too –

it is – I’m trying every day! But after a certain point in your

think of technology as something involving sitting

career, you tend to spend more time in meetings or at a

in

senior

and

technology is so many things. It's about how you

functions. The periods of my career when l was in Senegal,

reach people and how you communicate with

working in rural communities, seeing people's faces light up

people. Even if you don't think of yourself as a

when

‘techie’,

level

they

working

were

across

using

different

phones

I’d

organisations

given

them,

to

help

do

a

this

dark

work

room

as

better,

doing

long

as

then

I

algorithms

you're

absolutely

all

smart

day.

and

But

you're

improve their own communities, was one of the highlights.

passionate, there's so many powerful ways that

Also, debating with the project team, trying to persuade

you can utilise technology that will be valuable

them that even though it went against gender norms that

for

women in Afghanistan should be given smartphones. Being

technology sector and the development sector,

right in the heart of those debates, on the front lines, has

and it’s funny because there's so many ways in

really resonated with me and given me perspective that

which the development sector is behind. And of

informs the rest of my work. I will say there's something

all

about on-the-ground project work which I've just loved and

television industry, or whatever else is out there,

I

back to if I found the right way to do it.

we

the

ahead, to be in the lead.

would

That's

go

been

most

immensely

rewarding

for

me.

this

the

sector.

sectors

really

need

I

walk

we

the

know,

line

like

development

between

banking,

to

take

or

a

the

the

step

34

Perspectives

Has digitisation facilitated the rise of “digital totalitarianism”?

35

It is on the rise across all kinds of countries, but only because “we” (see: societies) allow for it. We are quick to highlight foreign forms of digital authoritarianism/totalitarianism, such as the social credit system, facilitated by technological improvements in surveillance. However, we need only look in our backyard: the NSA listens to Americans private calls through MYSTIC, Western Governments have access to an iPhone backdoor from an Israeli tech company, and nearly every street in London is covered with CCTV. People let fear of some “foreign” or remote danger allow their governments massive intrusions of their lives, which can invite danger from within through abuse of this tech. Thinking more theoretically, perhaps this creeping growth of digital surveillance and subsequently towards digital authoritarianism stems from lack of experience: we have been fortunate to live in an progressively improving society in which government abuses of people, while existent, have been declining, and thus built-in limits to state power, such as in a national constitution, seem less and less relevant and needed. Furthermore, if the state authority seems genuinely wanting to help society, this increased surveillance is not feared. Thus, when the state increases their surveillance and deem it for the “public good,” people can be seduced by this, and can often be found stating/thinking “You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.” Drawing from Hayekian theory,, this new tool/power (increased surveillance and state growth) will be very handy for the future leader who is not as benevolent as the current state.

In June, Vice reported that TikTok had formalised its process of collecting “biometric information” including “faceprints and voiceprints”. As Vice pointed out, what was to be done with these “faceprints and voiceprints” was broadly described, and no actual definition of either term was provided. This is by no means unique, and in some ways TikTok is being generous in spelling out

DA

Cambridge University Department of Education.

that it is actually collecting biometric information, rather than shoving it under a blanket “personally identifying information” clause. Yet, it stands as a worrying reflection of the wider industry - the digitisation of the bulk of social interactions, overseen by opaque moderation and promotion algorithms that even their creators are unsure of the operations of, has gamified and undermined individual agency in the social world. It has also enabled the building of increasingly effective biometric identification systems.

While the media likes to portray China as a surveillance state built upon a social credit dystopia, true, the fact that Euro-America’s “national security” complex has been built upon enforced compliance by private companies with state demands for data is illcovered. And that’s why the TikTok development is particularly worrisome - putting aside the average age of its users, its reach and its revenue put it in the same league as the existing social media giants. There is no doubt that upon the receipt of a government order,

Lewis Westwood Flood Cambridge University Department of Social Anthropology

TikTok will hand over all the biometric information it holds. There is no guarantee that government will have good intentions, as the NSO scandal proves.

Digitisation has transformed most of the citizens’ offline actions into online, including political participation and civic engagement. The growing level of ICT literacy and Internet penetration worldwide, globalisation, democratisation, and economic changes have also facilitated citizens to be involved in their communities’ issues with more possibilities and new ways as well as at a faster pace through new media such social media. Yet, all this have resulted in some states’ digital interference to citizens’ activities, providing some regimes with manipulation tools to track political dissent and thus maintain power. Particularly digital democratisation with challenges (e.g. in Hong Kong and Ukraine) has led states to develop their own techniques. On the on hand, some governments try to control their citizens in cyber space through sophisticated digital surveillance tools. Such tools use data that are gathered from users’ browsing history and social media, in which people practice their everyday life. Therefore, using the Internet, social media, and digital technologies citizens are vulnerable for state control. Such digitization has facilitated, for example, the rise of so-called ‘networked authoritarianism’ in Russia and Kazakhstan, and ‘digital totalitarianism’ in Myanmar and China. On the other hand, states still face difficulties to control all the Internet, social media, and independent IT companies because of multifaceted and contingent nature of new media and international pressure.

Yerkebulan Sairambay Cambridge University Department of Sociology

“Do people want privacy? Because they seem to put everything on the internet.” While Elon Musk has somewhat adjusted his stance on digital freedoms since making this comment in 2018 - recently urging people to use the encrypted messaging app Signal after calling Facebook '"lame" - his original question sought to challenge the idea that the everyday citizen really cares about protecting the privacy of their digital lives. His argument here is that most of us have made the seemingly rational conclusion that we have very little to fear about these companies (and governments) having access to our personal data. We have prioritized convenience over privacy.

Although I disagree with the assumption that this was a decision individuals could fairly consent to - owing to the gamified and ubiquitous nature of social media - that doesn’t mean I believe Musk is wrong to say that people simply don’t think too much about what they’re sharing. I certainly don’t read the T&Cs of the apps I have on my phone or the breakdown of the cookies of the websites I visit. Yet I also recognize that our collective data privacy apathy is undoubtedly being exploited by those with the powers to do so. China often comes up in these discussions as the centre of ‘digital totalitarianism,’ but similar oppressive powers are being wielded by the likes of Google and Facebook as their algorithms seek to retain user attention by suggesting misleading and harmful content.

So what's the solution? Well I think data empowerment solutions - the idea that individuals should control and the right to sell their own personal information - miss the reality Musk alludes to as well as the enormous power and influence companies and governments already have. This will not stop the rise of digital authoritarianism. Instead, we need to accept digitalisation as an opportunity for altruism. The use of AI assistance in the early diagnosis of Alzhemiers and Dementia, already shows how we can fight for algorithms of hope, rather than those designed simply for control or profit.

Jay Ayliffe

Cambridge University Department of History and Politics

36

Malavika Santosh Cambridge University Department Economics Technological innovation is often prescribed the solution to societal issues. Yet, our progress has had dire, unintended consequences: it has sharpened the tools of totalitarians.

Propaganda is much more insidious and more efficiently targeted than before. Social media platforms often become partisan echo chambers, with algorithms favouring the congregation of like-minded users to whom similar content is delivered to. Repeating and reinforcing chosen messages has never been so effortless. The widespread media coverage of PM Modi’s 71st birthday marks a breed of personality cultism not too dissimilar from that of the wartime totalitarian regimes. Adoring posts of the leader were plastered all over social media as part of a three-week celebration, stamped over with the strapline of the record-breaking delivery of 20 million COVID vaccines being a “birthday gift” to the public. Most disturbingly, AI has been weaponised by the Chinese Government to marginalise Uighur Muslims.

Vast databases of the population’s biometric data have been used to monitor their every move. Sophisticated deep-learning systems have created an ‘archive of faces’, that makes it easier to identify and condemn ‘subversive elements’ to internment camps. In short, digitalisation has led to a more efficient, less destructible version of the totalitarian state.

You wake up, startled by a loud notification coming from your phone. You pick it up. “

£10,000 has

just been withdrawn from your account” and right below “539-255 is your authentication code. Please don’t share it with anyone”. Except it’s too late. And it wasn’t you.

This is the reality of the digital world we live in, one that not even Tim Berners-Lee, co-creator of the Internet as we know it, could have ever predicted. Identity theft on an unparalleled level, hundreds of millions of personal data records leaked, privacy a thing of the past. Of all the malicious intentions these state actors might have, the one that can forever affect the course of history is the extreme weaponization of personal data. Nations, built over centuries, and their populations are being actively undermined from within. When the stakes are as high as they are, it’s no wonder in 2017 that data surpassed oil in value.

Matias Silva

Cambridge University Department of Engineering

Just a year before, many in billion-strong social media user bases were victims of targeted political advertising that preyed on the apparent innocence of benign content feeds. Meanwhile, every single ad was being cherry picked to minute detail -- think, the order, the exact timing, duration, all of these knobs tuned by data-fed algorithms to maximize outrage, inflammatory value, and ultimately, a vote for the “right” candidate in the ballot box. It’s easy to point blame to big tech, the likes of Google and Facebook that are enabling us to share our thoughts, our experiences, our lives more frequently than ever. But are the consequences of a tool fundamentally the responsibility of its creator, or its users? Oppenheimer might have a few words on this.

37

Recommendations Aid, Evolved – a podcast about technology, poverty and health (https://aidevolved.com/podcast/)

Books

Egyptian Streets – episode with Nour Emam: a podcast from Egyptian streets about an app called ‘thisismotherbeing’ which is teaching sexed to Egyptian women on Instagram (https://egyptianstreets.com/2021/03/07/podcast-nour-emamrevolutionizes-sex-ed-in-egypt/)

In Technology of the Oppressed, David Nemer draws on extensive ethnographic fieldwork to provide a rich account of how favela residents engage with technology in community technology centers and in their everyday lives. Their stories reveal the structural violence of the information age.

But they also show how those oppressed by technology don’t just reject it, but consciously resist and appropriate it, and how their experiences with digital technologies enable them to navigate both digital and nondigital sources of oppression — and even, at times, to flourish.

"Digital Lifeline?" examines the use of these technological innovations by the humanitarian community, exploring operations and systems that range from forecasting refugee flows to providing cellular and Internet connectivity to displaced persons.

The contributors, from disciplines as diverse as international law and computer science, offer a variety of perspectives on forced migration, technical development, and user behavior, drawing on field work in countries including Jordan, Lebanon, Rwanda, Germany, Greece, the United States, and Canada.

Podcasts

African’s building Africa - African Entrepreneurs who share insights about themselves and their businesses and how they’re participating in the development of Africa (https://www.stitcher.com/show/africans-buildingafrica)

In The Wealth of Humans, Economist editor Ryan Avent brings up-to-the-minute research and reporting to bear on the major economic question of our time: can the modern world manage technological changes every bit as disruptive as those that shook the socioeconomic landscape of the 19th century? Traveling from Shenzhen, to Gothenburg, to Mumbai, to Silicon Valley, Avent investigates the meaning of work in the twenty-first century: how technology is upending time-tested business models and thrusting workers of all kinds into a world wholly unlike that of a generation ago. It's a world in which the relationships between capital and labor and between rich and poor have been overturned.

38

VISION Michaelmas 2021

With many grateful thanks to our sponsors:

UID

V I S I

N

A Publication of Cambridge University International Development