#ICT4HR

|ndex

#ICT4HR Information and Communication Technologies for Human Rights

by Molly Land, Patrick Meier, Mark Belinsky, and Emily Jacobi

Disclaimer: The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report are entirely those of the authors.

They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.

FOREWORD This study aims to provide new knowledge and experience of the nexus between protection and promotion of human rights and the use of Information and Communication Technologies, a subject that has not received a lot of attention until recently. This particular ICT4Gov-ODTA project at the World Bank Institute (WBI) has now run for nearly three years, supported by the Nordic Trust Fund and directed by WBI’s Senior Governance Specialist Boris Weber. While most of the work of the project highlighted in this report focuses on country activities in the intersection of governance and human rights, the report opens the space for learning at a general and cross-cutting level, including reports from a number of country case studies in Eastern Africa, in Central America, and globally.

The study has been led by Professor Molly Land at New York Law School and her colleagues.

Within the World Bank, Tiago Peixoto from the WBI and Hans-Otto Sano of the Nordic Trust Fund were involved in commissioning the work. A series of consultations were held between the World Bank staff and Professor Land and her colleagues, including other members of the writing team — Patrick Meier, Mark Belinsky and Emily Jacobi. After a review of the draft in May 2012

by Mr. Weber, Mr. Peixoto and Mr. Sano, the final report was presented by Professor Land at a broader World Bank team on July 17th, 2012*.

In addition to the report, I invite you to watch the lead author discuss ICT and human rights in a video interview (bit.ly/ICT4HRintro). Also, feel free to join the conversation via Twitter at #ICT4HR. I hope you enjoy this study.

Robert R. Hunja

Manager, Open Governance Practice World Bank Institute

* Read a blog post about the presentation on the World Bank’s website: http://bit.ly/ICT4HRblog

This paper was authored by Molly Land, Patrick Meier, Mark Belinsky, and Emily Jacobi. Patrick Boyle, Christoph Doellefeld, Adam Gartenberg, Meredith Hutchison, John Kelly, Joe Raffanello and Carl Zander provided excellent research and drafting assistance. At the World Bank, this study was coordinated by Hans-Otto Sano, Tiago Peixoto and Boris Weber, and was sponsored by: r r r r

OPCS Nordic Trust Fund (http://worldbank.org/nordictrustfund) Open Development Technology Alliance (http://opendta.org) ICT4Gov (http://ict4gov.net) World Bank Institute (http://wbi.worldbank.org)

This paper is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Unported 3.0 License.

Join the conversation at #ICT4HR. Photos: Emily Jacobi Graphic design: Hernan Gigena

November 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...............................................................................................1 I.Background ........................................................................................................3 A.Social Media ................................................................................... 3 B.Mobile Phones ................................................................................ 4 II.Case Studies......................................................................................................7 Uchaguzi (Kenya)............................................................................... 7 Uwiano (Kenya) ................................................................................. 7 Map Kibera (Kenya) ............................................................................ 8 Sisi Ni Amani (“We Are Peace”) (Kenya) ................................................ 8 Voix des Kivus (DRC) .......................................................................... 8 Piga Simu (DRC) ................................................................................ 9 Amnesty International Science for Human Rights Program (Int’l) ............... 9 AAAS Remote Sensing (DRC) ............................................................... 9 ICT4GOV – South Kivu (DRC) ............................................................... 9 Educación Digna (Dominican Republic) ................................................ 10 Dominicana Contaminada (Dominican Republic).................................... 10 Medic Mobile (Int’l) ........................................................................... 10 III.ICTs and Human Rights .....................................................................................13 A.Supporting the Implementation of Rights............................................ 13 Freedom of Expression ............................................................. 13 Freedom of Association and Assembly ........................................ 14 Right to Participate in Public Affairs ............................................ 14 Economic, Social and Cultural Rights .......................................... 14 Rights of Vulnerable Populations ................................................ 15 B.Enforcing Rights ............................................................................ 16 Naming and Shaming ............................................................... 16 Organizing and Advocacy .......................................................... 16 C.Social Accountability ....................................................................... 18 IV.Human Rights Challenges..................................................................................21 A.Accuracy ...................................................................................... 21 B.Security ........................................................................................ 26 C.Inequality ...................................................................................... 29 D.Response ..................................................................................... 32 V.Recommendations .............................................................................................33

#ICT4HR

|ndex

8

NOV EMBER 2012

Promoting and Protecting the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression

WWW.OPEN DTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I G H T S

#ICT4HR

Executive Summary

N

ew technologies have been heralded as revolutionizing activism and government, providing a means for citizens to engage with others and with their government faster and more simply than ever before. As the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank LaRue, has explained, “the Internet is one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information, and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies.”1

Considerable attention has been focused on the opportunities presented by new information and communication technologies for development (“ICT4D”2) and for government (“ICT4GOV”3).

The purpose of this report is to analyze their impact on human rights (“ICT4HR”). As Philip Alston, the former Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, explained in a report to the General Assembly: “New technologies offer a great many potential solutions to some of [the] problems [in human rights fact-finding], and offer significant improvements in existing factfinding methodologies.”4 He notes, however, that there has been “[l]ittle sustained work . . . by the human rights community as a whole to apply existing technologies or to study their potential uses and problems.”5 This report aims to remedy that gap. Using case studies largely from three countries, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Dominican Republic, the report considers both the opportunities and risks presented by new technologies for human rights.

The report concludes there are benefits that can be realized through the deployment of new technologies in human rights projects. New technologies offer the potential to reduce the cost of collecting information about human rights issues and to increase participation in human rights advocacy efforts. Each of these possible benefits, however, gives rise to new risks and challenges.

Although new technologies can reduce the cost of information gathering, it can be difficult to ensure the accuracy of the information generated, and the associated volume can make it challenging and expensive to identify relevant data. There is also no guarantee that increased participation or information will be translated into action or concrete outcomes for the community.

The use of new technologies can also exacerbate human rights risks. Reliance on new technologies can replicate and even increase existing inequalities and barriers to participation.

Given the ease of information sharing in the digital context and the availability of tools to track and identify users, it can be especially difficult to ensure participant anonymity. The involvement of ordinary individuals in collecting information also presents particular challenges for security, because these individuals may lack the necessary training or professional protocols for assessing and taking measures to ensure security. Managing these risks is complicated by a tension between the approaches of human rights and technology experts. For example, the values and modus operandi of the technology field—a willingness to experiment and “to fail, adopt, and iterate”6— can be in some tension with the need to develop considered and reasoned security protocols ahead of time. In other worEs, while hacking is an iterative process, security is not.

|ndex

The report concludes by presenting several recommendations designed to respond at least in part to the human rights risks identified in the report. The report does not purport to provide a blueprint for all projects seeking to employ new technologies in furtherance of human rights or development goals. The challenges that arise in any particular project will be context specific and beyond the scope of this report. Rather, the report seeks to identify, in a preliminary manner, some of the questions that might be asked at the outset in order to respond to concerns about accuracy, security, and participation.

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

1

#ICT4HR

|ndex

2

NOV EMBER 2012

Managing, Processing and Disseminating Information in Social Media and

by Mobile Phone

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

I. Background

B

roadly understood, information and communication technologies (ICTs) are “technologies used in the conveying, manipulation and storage of data by electronic means.”7 ICTs include a variety of tools, platforms, and technologies that can be used to manage, disseminate, and process information, and include, among other things, the telephone, cell phones, radio, television, email, and the Internet. ICTs have long played a central role in the protection of human rights. Human rights NGOs use email to network, build coalitions, and communicate with relevant constituencies. They use radio to disseminate messages to far-flung constituencies.

More recent ICTs such as mobile phones and the Internet have played a particularly important role because they provide advantages in “speed, cost, scope, and interactivity”8 over prior forms of technology. The World Bank has asked us to focus in this report on the human rights impact of two particular developments in the area of ICTs— social media and mobile phones.

A.

Social Media

“Social media” refers to online platforms that allow interaction between individuals and groups.9 Much of the literature in the area of new ICTs has focused on the emergence of social media as an important “space” for political organizing.10 Social media platforms facilitate the ability to find and communicate with like-minded individuals in several ways. First, many of these platforms employ “content tagging,” by which content creators or recipients add tags (essentially digital “labels”) to content they view online. Tags allow others to quickly find relevant information and others with common interests. Second, social media platforms foster the broad dissemination of information because they encourage both strong and weak ties—connections both within and between groups.11 Weak ties, or connections between groups, allow messages to be quickly diffused outward.12 For example, even though

individuals participating in protests in Spain following the 2004 bombing in Madrid were only sending text messages about the protest to people they knew, the social media connections between these smaller groups allowed the messages to be diffused outwards to an exponentially growing community of interest.13 Third, individuals may turn to social media platforms for organizing because they are familiar with them through social uses and because they provide networks that are “already embedded in trusted networks of family and friends.”14 The rise of social media networks has also been accompanied by two important changes in methods of production. First, ordinary individuals are increasingly engaging in activities that used to be the domain of professionals—journalists, photographers, critics, and writers. Now, ordinary citizens are posting their pictures to Flickr and video to YouTube, blogging about their lives on the many low-cost or free blog hosting services, and writing encyclopedia entries on Wikipedia.

The development of open platforms that allow individuals to post their own content, coupled with greater access to the Internet and increasing bandwidth, has led individuals to become (and view themselves as) creators of, rather than simply the recipients of, creative content.15 The emergence of such “user-generated content” has been facilitated by the increasing digitization of cultural material and greater availability of tools individuals can use to manipulate or remix that content and post the results online.16

|ndex

Second, individuals—both citizens and professionals—are increasingly coming together to produce cultural works and social goods without the need for organizations. Yochai Benkler calls this a “new modality of organizing production: radically decentralized, collaborative, and nonproprietary; based on sharing resources and outputs among widely distributed, loosely connected individuals who cooperate with each other without relying on

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

3

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

either market signals or managerial commands.”17 This new mode of production, often called “peer production,” is a form of production undertaken by a group of self-organized professional or amateur volunteers.18 In other words, the revolutionary potential of these new technological tools is not the tools themselves but rather how people are using them—the development of social practices in which ordinary citizens are becoming human rights researchers and activists, engaging with each other and with governments, corporations and international institutions.

B.

|ndex

4

Mobile Phones

The proliferation of mobile phones has extended the benefits of information and communication technologies and new modes of production far more broadly than ever before. Historically, the ability to use ICTs for development or human rights has been limited by the “digital divide” —the fact that much of the developing world is not wired for telephone or Internet access. In many countries, however, mobile phones are quickly overtaking landlines as a primary mode of connection.19 This “leapfrogging” directly to mobile phone technology has connected remote locations at relatively low cost. Mobile phones operate on cellular networks, thus reaching areas that have not yet been connected by cable to telephone or broadband networks. (Some mobile phones also offer access to the Internet, either through these same cellular networks or through a wireless connection to a server; the second of these, however, requires a wired infrastructure.)

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Mobile phones also differ from land lines in three other important respects: First, they accompany individuals wherever they go, which means that they can be used to collect real-time, on the ground information. Second, they can be linked to a specific geographic location via GPS technology, which can facilitate the automatic classification and management of incoming content. Third, many mobile phones today have still and video cameras built into them, which allows the holders of these phones to capture still photos and video. Fourth, even the most basic mobile phones can send text or SMS messages in addition to voice transmission, allowing individuals to send brief snippets of information without the need for a phone call. Five, they lack basic security precautions unless specifically added. Unauthorized programs and people can often freely access personal information, including contacts, that can be sensitive in a human rights context.

The broad dissemination of mobile phones has been accompanied by the emergence of new methods for collecting information such as crowdsourcing. Jeff Howe coined the term “crowdsourcing” in 2006, defining it as “the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call.”20 Crowdsourcing can be used to collect and aggregate information, which services a variety of functions; among other things, the responses of a group can take advantage of latent or unrecognized knowledge and can eliminate the idiosyncratic aspects of an individual’s particular decision-making process.21

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

|ndex

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

5

#ICT4HR

|ndex

6

NOV EMBER 2012

Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominican Republic, and Kenya

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

II. Case Studies

T

his report draws its conclusions and recommendations from case studies primarily drawn from three country contexts: the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Dominican Republic, and Kenya. In consultation with the World Bank, the research team chose to focus on these three countries in order to ensure a manageable scope for the report and facilitate more in-depth analysis while still providing some diversity in terms of geography, levels of technological and economic development, and types of human rights issues. Each of the projects reviewed is summarized briefly below. Additional discussion of each project is provided throughout the report to illustrate and provide support for specific conclusions and recommendations.

The team and the World Bank chose the particular projects profiled in this report as projects that were relatively well documented and which illustrated a range of challenges and innovations.

The research methodology was qualitative. In the fall of 2011, the team engaged in background and secondary source research, conducted interviews with key informants via phone and email, and wrote case studies of each of the projects. In the spring and early summer of 2012, the team conducted follow up key informant phone and email interviews and drafted the report.

The limitations of this report follow from the above choices. The cases are illustrative but not representative. Interviews were conducted with one key informant for each project; no interviews were conducted with participants. The cases were also not initially selected using a human rights framework.

As a result, some rights were not featured in the initial set of case studies, including economic, social and cultural rights and voting rights. The team used secondary literature to add profiles of selected projects in the area of economic, social and cultural rights, but this research was very limited and did not include interviews. Due to time constraints, the research team also decided to exclude the issues of e-voting, e-government, mobile banking, and open data, which have been well documented by others.

The report also excluded consideration of the use of information collected via new technologies and methodologies in legal proceedings. With the exception of participatory budgeting, the report also does not focus on e-governance initiatives.

Uchaguzi (Kenya) Uchaguzi was designed to allow “citizens and civil society to report on electoral offenses such as intimidation, hate speech, vote buying, electoral offenses, misinformation, as well as alert authorities to raising tensions and acts of violence” during Kenya’s 2010 Constitutional Referendum.22 Uchaguzi was built on the Ushahidi platform23 and relied on crowdsourcing via SMS to map incidents of electoral disruption. The project established an SMS short code that individuals could use to send reports via mobile phones and also fielded reports through the Internet and Twitter.24 It also sent monitors into the field to observe and send back messages via SMS. Uchaguzi mapped these data points and made the information and maps available online. They also fed reports to local authorities who were able to respond to specific incidents of electoral irregularities.25

|ndex

Uwiano (Kenya) Uwiano used SMS messaging to collect citizen reports about problems during Kenya’s 2010 Constitutional Referendum.26 Uwiano received over 20,000 SMS messages in the weeks and days leading up to the referendum, and it tracked and responded to 122 incidents.27 Uwiano collected messages using both volunteers and trusted monitors.28 The project focused on reports of violence, rather than election irregularities as a whole.29 Although information about incidents was shared with authorities, “[u]nless granted permission from those submitting the information, identities were not provided to the responders, not even law enforcement.”30 The project was run by a partnership between the government, NGOs, and international development agencies.31 T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

7

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

Map Kibera (Kenya)

|ndex

Map Kibera is a participatory community mapping project in Kibera, one of the world’s largest slums, in Nairobi, Kenya. The project began as an effort to empower residents of Kibera to map their own community and to see themselves as valuable contributors and holders of important information about their community.32 In its initial phase, Map Kibera recruited a group of thirteen volunteers, provided them with training on GPS devices, and sent them into the field to collect information about “points of interest.” The volunteers then contributed this data to Open Street Map (OSM), a free and open-source mapping project that relies on mapping contributions from volunteers,33 by uploading GPS coordinates and descriptions to the online OSM map.34 Realizing it was difficult for Kibera residents to access the map online, the team also made printouts of the map and distributed them throughout the community.35 In later phases, the mapping team began issue-specific mapping— mapping points of interest related to issues such as health, security, education, and water and sanitation.36 Map Kibera also expanded to include a geo-located citizen journalism project, Voice of Kibera, as well as a collaborative community video news channel, Kibera News Network.37 Map Kibera has now started work in Mathare and Mukuru slums.38

Sisi Ni Amani (“We Are Peace”) (Kenya) SNA-K seeks to strengthen networks between local peace leaders as a way to prevent and deescalate violence.39 SNA-K employs SMS messaging to provide outlets for positive civic engagement in marginalized communities and to monitor and respond to signs of conflict. SNA-K works with local chapters, comprised of local peace leaders, to conduct a local conflict analysis and to plan activities to prevent and de-escalate conflict in their communities. Each chapter gets a phone number to which community members can subscribe and then builds a database of subscribers in their community with whom they can communicate through an SMS platform.40 SNA-K is also partnering with PopTech and partners on a project called PeaceTXT. The purpose of PeaceTXT is to leverage mobile messaging (SMS) to catalyze

8

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

behavior change for the prevention of violent conflict. Mobile messaging has proven particularly effective in catalyzing behavior change vis-a-vis public health issues. PeaceTXT seeks to replicate this success within the context of peace and conflict issues. Violence is often grounded in the stories and narratives that people tell themselves and the emotions that these stories generate.

Narratives shape identity and the social construct of reality—we interpret our lives through stories.

These have the power to transform relationships and communities. PeaceTXT seeks to catalyze behavior change vis-a-vis issues of violence at the community level by amplifying new narratives via SMS. To this end, customized SMS broadcast messages are developed in partnership with local partners in Kenya to change the way people think and react to highly contentious issues in the respective regions.41

Voix des Kivus (DRC) Voix des Kivus was a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) project funded by USAID and run by a group of researchers from the Center for the Study of Development Strategies at Columbia University to evaluate the feasibility of using a decentralized data collection system to generate representative information about events in areas of the DRC that were inaccessible because of the ongoing conflict.42 The project leaders developed the concept of “crowdseeding” and applied this methodology to collect conflict event-data in the Kivus.43 The project used random sampling to select eighteen villages in South Kivu and provided people in those villages with the ability to post accounts of events that affected their daily lives, such as disease outbreaks or attacks from rebel groups.44 Three individuals in each village were provided with a cell phone they could use to send text messages about these events. Phoneholders were asked to act as the representatives of their villages and to send information about anything they felt comfortable reporting.45 The project used the FrontlineSMS platform to collate this information.

In January 2010, Voix des Kivus introduced additional functionality that sent prices of local goods to phone holders and allowed those sending SMS messages to code the messages according to sensitivity.46 Although the project was initially

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

designed only to collect information for research purposes, the research team felt an obligation to try to share information with those who could use it.47 The team developed a system by which data without village identifiers was made available online as PDF bulletins and more detailed data was made available (with village consent) on a weekly basis to organizations in a position to respond to appeals.48 The system allowed internal validation and had a very high usage rate.49

Piga Simu (DRC) Piga Simu, which means “call” or “talk on the phone” in Kiswahaili, is a project run by the DRC advocacy group Si Jeunesse Savait (SJS). SJS uses the voice-based communications platform Freedom Fone50 to provide an interactive menu system with pre-recorded information about sexual assault and resources. Interested parties can call to learn more about their rights, how to file court claims, and health information.51 SJS developed the project to provide women with a means for accessing information anonymously, without risking stigma. SJS also provides a “call back” function that allows women to leave their information and receive a call back from a trained specialist and in a language they prefer.52 Because of the risks faced by women’s human rights defenders, SJS has also created functionality to link women’s human rights defenders with organizations who might provide them with support.53

Amnesty International Science for Human Rights Program (International) The Science for Human Rights (SHR) project at Amnesty International (AI) leverages technological and scientific progress for human rights advocacy and campaigning.54 More specifically, SHR uses geospatial technologies like satellite imagery for human rights monitoring and conflict prevention. Satellite imagery enables “access to previously inaccessible conflict zones, provide compelling visual evidence and present information in a new and engaging way, all of which assists our activists in their campaigning efforts.”55 The team at SHR has used satellite imagery to document human rights violations in dozens of conflicts around the world including Chad, Darfur, Kyrgyzstan, North Korea and Sri Lanka. In 2011, SHR partnered with the Standby Volunteer Task

#ICT4HR

Force (SBTF) to crowdsource the analysis of satellite imagery for three key cities in Syria to identify and corroborate further evidence of human rights violations in the country.56

AAAS Remote Sensing (DRC) The American Association for the Advancement of Science’s (AAAS) Geospatial Technologies and Human Rights Program uses tools such as satellite images, geographic information systems (GIS), and global positioning systems (GPS) to map and analyze areas where human rights abuses are alleged to have occurred.57 Geospatial tools can provide information about human rights violations in remote, isolated areas for which information is otherwise unavailable.

Remote sensing using geospatial technologies can also be used to corroborate on-the-ground reporting of conflicts and natural disasters affecting human rights. In May 2009, Human Rights Watch asked AAAS to use satellite images to document and corroborate violence targeting civilians in the area of Busurungi in the DRC. AAAS acquired and analyzed satellite imagery of 100 square kilometers in the area and was able to conclude that 1,494 structures had been destroyed. Satellite imagery showing the destruction of a village some time between August 31 and September 22 also indicated recent violence.58

|ndex

ICT4GOV – South Kivu (DRC) The ICT4GOV project in South Kivu in the DRC employs SMS messaging as part of its participatory budgeting work. The project is aimed at “facilitate[ing] decentralization by empowering stakeholders to participate in the process of participatory budgeting through the use of ICT.”59 The project uses SMS messages in four ways: to communicate information to participants, collect votes from those who are not present about their preferences and priorities for public projects, report back on projects that were undertaken, and engage in monitoring and evaluation of ongoing projects.60 Monitoring is accomplished through the use of observers: Civil society organizations monitor and report on the projects, and this information is then disseminated to the community via SMS.61 The project is also in the process of building an automated system that will collect predefined information via SMS about the status of public works projects and make this information available on a website.62

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

9

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

Educación Digna (Dominican Republic) Educación Digna is a coalition comprised of 199 different organizations seeking to pressure the government to enforce the General Education Law 66-97, which requires that 4% of GDP in the national budget be allocated to education. The coalition encourages citizen involvement through its website and via social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) and also maintains a database of members and legislators.63 The coalition’s website, hosted by Wordpress, provides information about events and links to social media websites.64 The website also contains several forums where users can post comments about experiences, show support, share poetry, and make suggestions.65

Dominicana Contaminada (Dominican Republic)

|ndex

10

Dominicana Contaminada is a campaign focused on opposition to illegal gold mining in the Dominican Republic and its harmful environmental effects.

The Dominicana Contaminada blog provides information about upcoming court processes related to the mining as well as reports about past and upcoming marches and the activities of the mining company, Barrick Gold.66 The campaign has used viral dissemination of video to document and communicate the human rights impact of the illegal mining.67 “Mirrors for Gold,” for example,

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

is a documentary by Jose Maria Cabral that was disseminated through the Dominicana Contaminada blog as well as sites such as YouTube68 and Vimeo.69 The campaign also leveraged Dropbox and BBM to disseminate media content in a cost-effective manner.

Medic Mobile (International) Medic Mobile provides a set of open-source software tools that facilitate the collection and delivery of health care information via mobile phone. In low-resource settings, a lack of infrastructure and low doctor-patient ratios can impede the delivery of health services.70 Community health care workers help address that gap, but workers must often travel great distances to reach isolated patients.71 Medic Mobile develops and extends existing mobile phone platforms to support community health workers in a variety of ways, including “community health worker coordination and management, community mobilization for vaccination and satellite clinics, logistics and supply chain management, referrals, routine data collection, and mapping of health services.”72 In addition, the team is developing apps for SIM-cards rather than just for smart phones. Medic Mobile now works with over thirty partners in fifteen different countries.73

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

|ndex

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

11

#ICT4HR

|ndex

12

NOV EMBER 2012

An Important Vehicle for Freedom of Expression

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

III. ICTs and Human Rights

I

nternational human rights are protected by both customary international law and human rights treaties. The two primary human rights treaties are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).74 These treaties are complemented by seven additional issue-specific treaties.75 Although contained in two different treaties, the rights protected under the ICCPR and the ICESCR are interrelated, interdependent, and indivisible.76 Social media and mobile phones can play an important role in the protection of individual human rights. First, these ICTs can support the implementation of rights. For example, individuals can express themselves or engage in the political life of the community via social media or mobile phones. Social media and mobile phones can also be used to provide information, such as information about health care, that is necessary for the fulfillment of rights, such as the right to health.77 Second, ICTs can help enforce rights. The can be used, for example, to collect information needed to put pressure on duty-bearers to change their behavior, assess local needs, evaluate compliance. They can also provide platforms for organizing and advocacy. Third, new technologies can also be used to promote social accountability.

Social accountability is an over-arching concept that “refers to the broad range of actions and mechanisms beyond voting that citizens can use to hold the state to account, as well as actions on the part of government, civil society, media and other societal actors that promote or facilitate these efforts.”78

A.

Supporting the Implementation of Rights

Freedom of Expression The broad dissemination of the means for communication, such as mobile phones, coupled with systems designed to capture, preserve, and

organize information submitted through those means, provides an important vehicle for freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is protected under Article 19 of the ICCPR. Article 19(2) of the ICCPR provides that “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”79 Extending the reach of new technologies via mobile phones and providing ways to organize that information enables individuals to impart information and ideas of all kinds—and to do so across vast frontiers.

Voix des Kivus illustrates the role new technologies can play in the fulfillment of the right to impart ideas and information across frontiers.

Although created to gather information about atrocities in remote areas of the DRC, the project has also proven itself to be an important vehicle for expression: “For participating communities, it provides a system for creating histories, archiving testimonies, and communicating with the rest of the world.”80 Indeed, the Voix des Kivus project indicates that the expressive capacity of new technologies appears to be a strong motivation for participation, even apart from project outcomes.

Although the research team shared information with partner organizations, this information was not acted upon. The team asked participants why they continued to share information, despite this lack of response. Participants responded that they wanted to keep open the possibility of a response and because, in the words of one, “for the first time, we’re being put on the map.”81

|ndex

Citizen journalism can also give effect to Article 19’s requirement that “everyone” have the right to express ideas and information—not just professional journalists. Voice of Kibera gives residents of Kibera the opportunity to publish news and information about their community.82 Kibera News Network is a collaborative community video T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

13

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

news channel. A dedicated group of participants take video of events within Kibera and upload the videos to YouTube.83 Both of these projects enable ordinary community members to express themselves about happenings in their community.

New technologies also help fulfill individuals’ ability to seek and receive information, both of which are protected under Article 19 of the ICCPR.84 For example, mobile phones allow individuals to access information they would otherwise not have been able to access because of their remote location or the lack of infrastructure in low-resource contexts. Piga Simu and Voix des Kivus, for example, push relevant information to recipients—about sexual violence and the prices of local goods, respectively. Because of the lack of infrastructure in the DRC, it would be otherwise difficult for individuals to obtain this information.

Freedom of Association and Assembly |ndex

Social media and other new technologies also provide a vehicle for the right to freedom of association.

Article 22(1) of the ICCPR provides, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others . . . .”85 Social media platforms provide a space for individuals to find and connect—to associate—with others. Indeed, in early 2011, responding to Egypt’s decision in late January of that year to shut down the Internet, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a speech in which she called the Internet “the public space of the 21st century – the world’s town square, classroom, marketplace, coffeehouse, and nightclub.”86 The case studies also reflect the importance of social media for freedom of association. For example, the movement to oppose illegal mining in the Dominican Republic used the Contaminada Dominicana blog and social media platforms to connect with others interested in this issue.

Social media platforms also facilitate the right to freedom of assembly in the offline world. Article 21 provides that “[t]he right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized.”87 Educación Digna, for example, uses its website and social media platforms to build and communicate with its constituency and organize protests, including “Yellow Monday,” a day of country-wide flash mobs wearing yellow and carrying yellow umbrellas.88

14

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Right to Participate in Public Affairs New technologies also provide the means for realizing the right to “take part in the conduct of public affairs,” a right protected under Article 25 of the ICCPR. Article 25(a) of the ICCPR provides that “[e]very citizen shall have the right and the opportunity . . . [t]o take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives.”89 Mobile phones and social media can provide vehicles through which individuals can participate directly in government and the conduct of public affairs. The ICT4GOV project in South Kivu, for example, uses SMS messaging to empower stakeholders to take part in the participatory budgeting process. Through SMS messages, individuals receive messages about the process, vote on priorities for public funding, and learn about the progress of public works projects.

New technologies can also foster the ability to participate in public affairs by generating valuable information that can provide political leverage. Map Kibera, for example, facilitated the involvement of Kibera residents in local political processes by giving them a means for generating information that was valuable to other groups.90 New technologies can help disseminate information about the political process, educate voters, and provide a vehicle for political conversation. For example, Sisi Ni Amani conducted civic education and voter education in a Nairobi constituency in connection with the election of a new Member of Parliament and was able to respond with SMS messages to moderate tensions that arose with the postponement of the election.91

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Access to information is critical for the protection of many rights, such as rights to health, education, and an adequate standard of living. ICTs that enable easier and faster exchange of information play an important role in securing these rights. Mobile phones, for example, help improve the delivery of health information, a critical determinant of the right to health. Article 12 of the ICESCR protects “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health” and requires that states create “conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.”92

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

Health information is an essential determinant of the human right to health. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR Committee), the international body charged with monitoring state compliance with the ICESCR,93 has made clear that the right to health extends “not only to timely and appropriate health care but also to the underlying determinants of health, such as . . . access to health-related education and information, including on sexual and reproductive health.”94 Mobile technology is helping to deliver health information in a variety of ways. Medic Mobile is using text messaging to help community health workers communicate with clinics and doctors. For example, Medic Mobile technology has been used in Malawi to track tuberculosis symptoms, report about patient adherence with drug regimes, send appointment reminders, send alerts about medical emergencies, and consult with physicians.95 Medic Mobile and other companies are also developing technology that can be used to send pictures of blood samples over cell phones by MMS messaging (Multimedia Messaging Service) for diagnosis.96 New technologies are also being used to collect and organize medical records in low-resource settings.97 Mobile health or “mHealth” technologies have been developed for almost every type of traditional health care including prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prenatal care, outbreak mapping, and a number of administrative needs.98 Mobile technologies are also being used to deliver education. Article 13(1) of the ICESCR provides that “States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education.”99 Both mobile phones and social media can be deployed to facilitate the right to education. Nokia Mobile Learning for Mathematics (Nokia Momaths), for example, is an “educational intervention using mobile telephones” first deployed in South Africa.100 A partnership between Nokia, several private interests, and a number of South African governmental agencies, Momaths initially ran as a pilot to explore the efficacy of using mobile technology to “support learning of Grade 10 mathematics.”101 The pilot had two components, “interactive mathematics learning materials using a mobile delivery platform combined with a social media application for peerto-peer support.”102 Through the mobile platform, teachers can provide additional exercises and

#ICT4HR

“keep track of learners who are using the service and how they are doing with the exercises.”103 Learners can use the service to obtain additional practice and “compare their progress with other learners in their class, province or country.”104 The program has since been expanded to more schools and learners in South Africa and has been deployed in Finland.

The acquisition of technical or vocational skills can also be a secondary effect of projects aimed at fulfilling other rights. Under Article 13(2), states are obligated to make secondary education, “including technical and vocational secondary education,” both available and accessible to all “by every appropriate means.”105 States are also obligated to encourage or intensify fundamental education “as far as possible for those persons who have not received or completed the whole period of their primary education.”106 One of the goals of MapKibera, for example, was to provide participants with computer literacy skills that they could use to obtain further opportunities.107

|ndex

New technologies can also play a role in fulfilling the right to an adequate standard of living. Article 11 of the ICESCR recognizes the “right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family.”108 Dissemination of knowledge related to food prices and markets, for example, can help farmers obtain better prices for their crops and thus augment their ability to maintain an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families. Mobile technologies are currently being employed in a variety of places to help farmers with crop prices. Voix des Kivus, for example, phone holders can be sent prices of local goods upon request.109 DAI has a project in Afghanistan in which farmers can send in questions about commodities and markets and receive phone calls and texts in return with market prices and other information.110

Rights of Vulnerable Populations New technologies can help enable the effective exercise of the rights of vulnerable populations such as women and individuals in rural areas. Piga Simu, for example, provides recorded messages about sexual violence resources to individuals who

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

15

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

would otherwise have to walk days to obtain that information from a hospital. The use of technology to reach remote areas—such as mobile phones and remote sensing in the DRC—generates information about human rights abuses against rural and isolated populations that can empower them to protect their own rights and support efforts to hold governments accountable.

Assuming security precautions are in place, technology can also enable greater anonymity, which can be important in protecting the rights of women and other vulnerable groups. SJS chose Freedom Fone to provide information about sexual violence because it allowed callers to be anonymous. Women didn’t want to talk about violence with people who knew them, since it was associated with stigma.111 Providing a way for women to access information without revealing their identities helped overcome what is otherwise a significant barrier to access information about sexual violence. |ndex

B.

Enforcing Rights

Social media and mobile phones can also play an important role in enforcing rights. States have an obligation to respect and ensure the rights protected by the ICCPR and to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights protected under the ICESCR.112 This means that states must not only refrain from violating rights themselves but also protect populations and groups from violation of their rights by third parties,113 and “adopt legislative, judicial, administrative, educative and other appropriate measures in order to fulfil their legal obligations.”114 Human rights obligations can also operate indirectly on private actors such as corporations.

Although states are the primary actors under international law, states are obligated to protect individuals from violations of their rights by third parties.115 In addition, the United Nations Secretary General’s Special Representative for Business and Human Rights, John Ruggie, recommends that corporations engage in human rights due diligence to evaluate and minimize the human rights impact of their activities.116

16

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Naming and Shaming One of the most well-established mechanisms for enforcing human rights is “naming and shaming,” the process of gathering information about a dutybearer’s human rights record and publicizing that information in an effort to pressure or shame the duty-bearer into changing its conduct.117 Given the absence of enforcement structures on the international level, applying pressure by publicizing abuses is one of the most important tools available to human rights organizations.

Historically, human rights organizations employed researchers in the field to gather information about human rights violations. New technologies aid in that effort by providing a fast and cost-effective means for gathering a significant amount of information, including from places that may be otherwise inaccessible.118 Voix des Kivu and the AAAS’s remote sensing project in the DRC both were able to collect information from regions that were inaccessible because of ongoing conflict. Information is also collected in real-time, allowing faster response times. Uchaguzi’s system, for example, enabled rapid communication and response, vastly speeding up reporting that would have otherwise required days or weeks to transmit via traditional methods.119 Further, information can be collected from a much wider geographic area and more diverse sources than would be possible employing traditional methods.120 In these ways, mobile phones and techniques like crowdsourcing can significantly reduce the cost of information gathering.121 The information that is collected can then be used to “name and shame” or otherwise put pressure on governments to improve their human rights records. Human Rights Watch, for example, used the AAAS’s conclusions about the destruction of structures near Busurungi of the DRC to engage in advocacy to protect civilians in the region.122

Organizing and Advocacy New technologies also augment enforcement efforts by providing additional channels through which individuals can organize and engage in human rights advocacy. Although the record of

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

social media tools in facilitating political change has been mixed and empirical evidence lacking, what is clear is that these tools are being used for political organizing.123 Social media provide a channel for communicating with partners and the public at large, raising awareness about and generating support for a movement.124 Social media platforms can provide convenience, familiarity, and ease of dissemination.

The Education Digna campaign, for example, chose to use social media for its work because those were the communication channels used by its audience.125 The Contaminada Dominicana project, for example, disseminated links to the “Mirrors for Gold” video through social media sites because individuals could access the video on their own time and spread the link to others.126 Networks also facilitate connections between local and international groups.127 Finally, the availability of video and camera functionality on many smart phones means that witnesses can capture images of violations, which can spread on social networks and become a rallying point for a cause.128 Networks and social media also enable wider participation in human rights initiatives. The broad dissemination of the means to capture and share information about what is happening on the ground makes everyone a potential human rights researcher.

As one human rights organization observes, [N]ew technologies are challenging longheld assumptions about how human rights documentation and advocacy functions and who does it. More and more people, including many who might not see themselves as human rights activists, are now using video and social media to create, share and organize around issues they care about.129 Networks and social media also make possible broad participation. It is easier than ever before for ordinary individuals to support human rights advocacy campaigns by clicking a button to sign a petition or sending a text to donate. At the same time, there are questions about what the broad availability of such “low-cost” activism, or “clicktivism,”130 contributes to human rights advocacy or other social movement efforts. On the one hand, low-cost activism enables those who do not want to or cannot become deeply involved

#ICT4HR

to play a part and reduces the cognitive distance between ordinary individuals and human rights work.131 On the other, the broad participation enabled by social media does not seem to foster the kind of deep political activism needed to achieve social change.132 Some combination of strong and weak ties online, coupled with strong ties in the offline context, may help provide both broad mobilization and deep participation.133 Commentators have also disagreed about the extent to which the lack of hierarchy that characterizes social media networks fosters or undermines efforts to achieve social change. Some argue that social change requires centralization and clear leadership structures.134 Others argue that social media is valuable precisely because it enables organization without hierarchy,135 and that leaderless revolutions are stronger because they are harder to target.136 On this issue, as well, the truth likely lies somewhere between. As Professor Sarah Joseph argues, “While loose networks may play a key role in forcing dramatic and profound political change, more organized hierarchies are needed to anchor that change . . . .”137

|ndex

New information technologies also help foster individuals’ awareness of themselves as rights holders, a critical precondition to the effective exercise of rights. Participants in Voix des Kivus, for example, felt that the ability to share their stories with the world gave them a “voice.”138 Because new technologies provide ordinary individuals with the ability to collect information themselves, without relying on intermediaries, it can serve to strengthen their sense of autonomy and empowerment. Autonomy and empowerment are critical for human rights enforcement because these feelings make it more likely that individuals will act to protect themselves and demand protection of their rights vis-à-vis duty bearers such as their governments. Participants may even be empowered to get involved in their communities in other ways.

For the organizers of the Map Kibera project, for example, one of the unexpected results of the project was an inspired sense of commitment and volunteerism from Kibera residents to continually maintain and update the mapping project.139

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

17

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

It is difficult to reach conclusions about whether social media is “effective” in fostering activism and social change. In part, this is because there is no single definition or measure of success.

Further, because each context in which activism occurs is different, it can be difficult to developed generalized theories. Finally, it may not be possible to establish causation.140 As a result, a definitive answer to the question about the relationship between social media and social change is not possible. What is possible, however, are more empirical studies about the role of social media in particular situations, such as Professor Joseph’s study of the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, that focus on the advantages and disadvantages of using social media in that context.141 Because of its structure as a survey of several projects over three countries, this study was not able to delve deeply enough into any one case study to reach conclusions of this nature. |ndex

C.

Social Accountability

New technologies are also important in promoting social accountability. Although social accountability can include any method by which citizens are involved in holding governments accountable,142 recent initiatives emphasize citizen engagement, particularly through the “expanded use of participatory data collection and analysis tools.”143 Social accountability mechanisms can promote the protection of individual rights, particularly the right to participate in political life, and play an important role in enforcing rights.

18

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Social accountability and rights-based approaches are complementary and overlapping. The two intersect precisely at those points at which governments, recognizing their obligations to respect, protect, and ensure the rights of their citizens, involve citizens in the processes by which this is accomplished. While some approaches to human rights enforcement seek to pressure governments to comply with international obligations, the new generation of social accountability approaches envision a more collaborative role, one in which citizens are directly involved in oversight of the government’s efforts to respect, protect, and fulfill rights. Among other things, social accountability projects may help the government understand the nature of ongoing human rights violations or provide citizens with more opportunities to put pressure on local officials.

New technologies can foster social accountability and thus promote positive human rights outcomes by reducing the time needed to gather, organize and transmit to appropriate government responders the information that they need to protect rights.

Uwiano, for example, was a collaboration between government agencies, non-profits and international development organizations that relied on volunteers and trusted reporters to generate information about violence that could be used by first responders, including the police. The information that was generated via SMS messages was filtered and analyzed and provided to the authorities. In one instance, for example, the police set up a buffer zone at a rally after receiving information that a group was going to try to disrupt the event.144

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

|ndex

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

19

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

|ndex

20

Accuracy Security Inequality Response

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

IV. Human Rights Challenges

A

lthough they offer considerable opportunities for human rights advocacy, these new technologies also present important challenges. The very features of social media and mobile phones, as well as new techniques of collecting information such as crowdsourcing, that make them so valuable, also engender significant risks. For example, one of the strengths of crowdsourcing via mobile phones is that anyone can now be a human rights researcher, gathering information in real time and sharing it with the world. On the other hand, that is precisely one of its greatest risks—anyone can try to be a human rights researcher and attempt to engage in documentation without the training, protocols or support that researchers normally have. This section evaluates some of the challenges that new technologies pose for human rights advocacy.

A.

is particularly difficult when the sources are anonymous, since recipients cannot evaluate the credentials of the reporter. (And even if provided, such credentials may not be accurate.) In many instances, the government itself may be the source of misinformation online. During the recent Syrian conflict, for example, the government spread false information over Twitter.147 Moreover, just as social media makes it easier to disseminate the good information, it also makes it easier to disseminate the bad. As Joshua Goldstein and Juliana Rotich observed in the context of the 2008 Kenyan elections, “mobile phones made hateful and violent messages easier and cheaper to transmit.”148 New technologies can be a “catalyst to both predatory behavior such as ethnic-based mob violence and to civic behavior such as citizen journalism and human rights campaigns.”149

|ndex

Accuracy

Accurate information is critical in human rights advocacy. Although accuracy is clearly important in the development and humanitarian contexts, as well, accuracy often plays a different role with respect to human rights. Accurate information is important because it provides the “currency” for enforcement efforts. The efficacy of naming and shaming as an enforcement technique depends critically on the quality of the information gathered. Unless human rights reports are accurate, they will be vulnerable to attack by the states they target and will be ineffective in pressuring states to change their behavior.145 Accurate reporting is also important in mobilizing the press and public opinion, since the public is more likely to support information it finds legitimate and credible.146

Because of the risk of politicization, accuracy may be particularly difficult to ensure in projects that seek to evaluate the performance of dutybearers. Map Kibera, for example, had initially wanted to crowdsource reports on the effectiveness of local development projects in Kibera. Early on, however, they realized that these reports would be highly politicized and in fact could result in liability for the organization.150 Such reporting could also alienate local NGOs, who provide important channels of communication to local constituencies.151 When it implements the portion of the project aimed at soliciting information about the status of public works projects by SMS, the ICT4GOV project in South Kivu plans to try to minimize the risk of politicization by ensuring that the questions are purely factual.152

Information submitted by ordinary citizens can be particularly vulnerable to errors. The information may be mistaken, wrong, exaggerated, or even intentionally misleading or distorted. Once reported, inaccurate information can be picked up by other sources, vaulting faulty information to the headlines in an echo-chamber effect. Verification

Even if accurate, information might also be taken out of context. Human rights investigators and journalists are trained to understand the importance of context—that information has relevance and meaning in part because of the context in which it occurs. Citizen reporters may not necessarily report the full context that would T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

21

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

be necessary to evaluate the information provided.

Further, social media and digitization make it extremely easy to take material out of context, remix it with other images, and redistribute: “Appropriating existing content (music/images/ videos) and mixing it with fresh content in new ways is a cheap, effective, and popular form of political expression. However, remixing often relies on de-contextualizing footage that has a specific human rights purpose.”153 Despite these limitations, the case studies illustrate a variety of approaches for verifying and providing context for crowdsourced information. Broadly, these approaches seek to validate information by authenticating the data itself or by establishing trust in the reporter. Ideally, the best verification systems would do both and a corpus of strategies to verify crowdsourced information, called “information forensics,” is becoming increasingly available.154

|ndex

Bounded crowdsourcing or “community sourcing,” relies on reporting not from the general public but from a growing network of trusted reporters.155 This methodology is similar to “snowball” sampling in survey research. Another approach is “crowdseeding” which extends the concept of bounded crowdsourcing to produce a statistically representative sample. Crowdseeding provides three advantages: First, it presents the possibility of collecting more information from more participants. With crowdsourcing, only those who are both informed and have the resources to take part will participate. Crowdseeding addresses this deficiency by equipping particular reporters with the resources to take part and ensuring that the entire community knows they can contribute information through these reporters. Second, crowdseeding provides the opportunity to select information from a random sample (as opposed to whoever participates, which is the case with crowdsourcing). Third, crowdseeding can improve the quality of the data since it increases the reporter’s incentive to be honest and minimizes the risk of random misinformation.156 Voix des Kivus employed this approach by using random sampling techniques to select villages and then asking three individuals in each village to serve as reporters.157 Trust can be established either by individual relationships with the reporters, as

22

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

was the case in Voix des Kivus, or by gathering information about the reporter through his or her online identity.158 Uchaguzi and Uwiano also relied on information from trusted reporters, in addition to information from the crowd.159 Bounded crowdsourcing and crowdseeding may result in more accurate information because the reporters are known and thus their credibility can be assessed.

As in Voix des Kivus, a long-term relationship with the project may lead them to be more reliable reporters.160 Because they are identified in advance, they can also be trained and selected from representative geographic locations.161 Identifying reporters in advance may, however, make it easier to identify the individuals providing information and thus increase their security risk.162 Information can be corroborated by information from other unknown sources, trained observers, or mainstream media. Voix des Kivus, for example, selected three individuals as trusted reporters in part to be able to triangulate their reports against one another.163 In addition to verification through its trusted sources, Uchaguzi also compared incoming reports to reports from the mainstream media.164 Although this aspect of the project has not yet been implemented, the ICT4GOV project plans to verify information received through SMS messages about the status of public works projects by comparing reports and investigating discrepancies. Information can also be internally corroborated by evaluating whether it is internally consistent. Internal and external corroboration is especially useful for projects in which the trustworthiness of the source cannot be established because it is anonymous. Corroboration can also help to expand your network of trusted sources by verifying reports of previously unknown reporters and, over time, contributing to their credibility.166 In projects involving significant quantities of data, verification can also be accomplished by aggregation. Aggregating reports from many individuals about can provide a way to identify those incidents that are more credible than others because they are confirmed by other reports.167 As a method of verification, aggregation has important limitations, however. Among other things, it may be difficult to obtain the volume of reports needed for such an approach to work, particularly with respect to human rights violations that are more systematic or invisible.168

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

Information can also be verified through investigation. Uchaguzi, for example, used its trained observers in the field to verify incoming reports. When a report came in of voter fraud or misinformation, it was relayed to one of the observers for verification.169 The Voice of Kibera citizen news outlet established an editorial board of trusted individuals to verify incoming reports.170 Video and still images can also be verified by weather reports, landmarks, and shadows.171 Uwiano verified information by calling back the numbers associated with the messages and conducting brief interviews.172 One disadvantage of investigation is that it may eliminate the anonymity that enabled the report in the first place. Some of those who reported information to Uwiano, for example, were reluctant to reveal details when they were called back because they did not know the person who was returning their call. In those instances, the team would turn to an NGO or official to verify reports.173 Projects might also manage problems of verification through disclosure. Voice of Kibera, for example, realizing that its internal investigators would not be able to verify all reports, decided to publish almost all of the reports on their site but to label them with tags of either “verified” or “unverified” and allow readers to judge for themselves.174 Uchaguzi also opted to post reports from both trusted an anonymous sources, “visualizing messages received from the crowd with black dots and reports from officially trained election monitors through our partner CRECO [Constitution and Reform Education Consortium] with blue.”175 Providing additional information about the data received allowed the public to “sort through and decide how much weight to give to each report.”176 Methods of verification can also be combined or different methods applied at different stages. Voix des Kivus, for example, sent a field coordinator to investigate reports at the outset of the project,177 but ceased investigation once it established that the messages were of high quality. After that, the project relied on triangulating the reports of the three village reporters, while backing this up with phone contact between the reporter and the field coordinator and occasional visits by the field coordinator to the village.178

#ICT4HR

Finally, at least one project is planning to employ human review to ensure that reports included the context necessary for interpretation. Sisi Ni Amani plans to rely on chapter leadership to interpret reports: “As community leaders and through their conflict prevention efforts, they will have a strong qualitative understanding of local dynamics that will position leadership to make informed interpretations of shifting conflict dynamics that reflect the unique nature and context of the community.”179 Ensuring a diverse membership may be key to helping provide adequate context for community reports, particularly in times of crisis: “The intergroup nature of the chapters will also help balance analysis, ensuring that cognitive bias or perceptions that may pique during high periods of tension are mitigated.”180

B.

Security

New technologies also pose substantial risks both for those who collect information and those about whom information is collected.181 Collecting and disseminating information about human rights violations can put both reporter and source at risk of retaliation, whether from the state or other community members. Depending on the context, the reporter and the source may want to preserve their anonymity. New technologies make it difficult to ensure anonymity for several different reasons.

|ndex

First, digital information is easily captured, copied, and shared.182 This means that identifying information (whether contained in the data itself or hidden in its code) can be disseminated quickly and widely before steps can be taken to prevent the loss of anonymity. The Iranian and Burmese governments, for example, have used photos and video footage of protests to identify demonstrators and onlookers.183 Indeed, the Iranian government used crowdsourcing in the process, posting images captured from YouTube and asking the public to help identify those involved.184 In addition, because information is so easily copied and shared, there is a greater risk of re-victimization. Each publication of a victim’s story—particularly when that account is captured in the form of video—can be experienced as another assault on the victim’s integrity and dignity and can cause additional trauma. The ability to quickly and easily share stories of abuse thus poses risks for victim security.185

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

23

#ICT4HR

|ndex

NOV EMBER 2012

Second, digital information also contains considerably more identifying information than other means of communication, and individuals are often not aware that this information is embedded in the content they create. For example, digital information may contain markers that could reveal the identity or location of the person who collects or transmits the information.186 Mobile phones, in particular, can be used to track the phone holder’s location.187 Individuals collecting and submitting information via mobile phone may not be aware that the content they create can be used to find them.188

messages to be segmented and provide different levels of viewing privileges.194 In the Voix des Kivus project, reporters themselves classified information according to security risk when they sent it to the central team, indicating with whom they thought the text should be shared.195 Edited data was returned to the village; coarsened data, without village identifiers, was made available online as PDF bulletins; finer data, with the village but no individual identifiers, was made available, after consultation with the villages, to organizations in a position to respond to village appeals.196

Third, it can be difficult and expensive to maintain the physical security of digital information containing identities of sources or reporters.

Information could be vulnerable to interception while being transmitted. Security solutions may require a level of technological expertise and capacity that human rights organizations may not possess. Physical servers housing sensitive data might be at risk of being accessed. Information might also be held by third parties, who could be compelled by court order or otherwise to provide the information to the government. In low resource environments, technology is more often shared, which means that information stored on the device may not be secure.189 Data may also be at risk of physical loss due to virus, theft, fire, neglect, or other reasons.190

Projects also managed security risks by deciding not to collect some kinds of information at all. The ICT4GOV project, for example, does not collect identifying information concerning who voted for which public works project.197 This may be particularly important if there are concerns about the security of physical servers or involvement by the government.

Projects employed several techniques to protect the security of the information they gathered. One of the most common techniques was to carefully control the collected data and remove identifying information before circulation. The Voix des Kivus research team, for example, would heavily edit the translated texts it received, removing village names and the names of people, and removing entirely any texts that could have repercussions within the village.191 Uwiano released data to the public in aggregated form so that individuals could not be identified.192 It never released any identifying information, even to the law enforcement authorities charged with responding to the reported concerns.193 Projects also managed the security risk of information containing sensitive information by controlling access to the data. Sisi Ni Amani, for example, is developing a system that will allow

24

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Projects also implemented precautions to protect the physical security of the data collected. Because local human rights defenders are at risk of retaliation in the DRC, SJS decided to house any data received via Piga Simu on the servers at its headquarters in Kinshasa instead of on-site with partners, 2000 miles away from the project implementation site.198 Others took steps to ensure the physical security of printouts of the information collected. In the initial stages of the Voix des Kivus project, for example, the field coordinator would take a printout of information submitted from each village to the village to verify the content with each reporter. The list was printed in a way that only made sense to the coordinator and not to anyone who might stop him on the street.199 Reporters may be uniquely vulnerable in several ways. In projects that employ bounded crowdsourcing, their identities are known, which may lead them to be targeted. In some cases possessing the technology can present a risk in and of itself. In Kibera News Network, for example, participants were provided with Flip Cameras, which put them at greater risk of theft and pickpockets.200 Given the risk to identified reporters, Voix des Kivus initially considered keeping their identities secret.

The villages rejected this, however, as both futile and potentially causing greater suspicion and distrust.201

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

Although never used, to protect reporters, Voix des Kivus implemented a “security alert” function by which reporters could send a text and receive a call back immediately asking if there was a need to send peacekeepers.202 Projects were also concerned with the safety of those generating information. Sisi Ni Amani, for example, voiced concern that in localized projects, those who access the information would be likely to be able to identify those who were reporting information.203 As a result, the project is considering using network members as “proxy” reporters to protect the identity of those who volunteer.

Individuals will be able to send reports to members of the network they trust, who would then report the information further without identification.204

C.

Inequality

Although new technologies can help protect the rights of vulnerable populations, they can also reinforce existing inequalities by excluding individuals who lack access.205 The digital divide— the fact that many parts of the developing world are not connected to phone lines and Internet cables— remains a real problem.206 Mobile telephones have gone a long way toward overcoming the digital divide; indeed, mobile subscriptions appear to have overtaken Internet penetration in many countries in Africa.207 Several of the projects employed mobile phones because of greater access. Uchaguzi, for example, chose to use mobile phones rather than the Internet to collect information because the number of Kenyans with mobile phones far outweighed the number with Internet access.208 Map Kibera chose SMS because its research indicated that most of the Kibera residents either owned or had access to a mobile phone through friends or family.209 The ICT4GOV project in South Kivu, for example, chose to use SMS because mobile phones were both widespread and suited to a context in which electricity was scarce.210 Yet mobile still presents significant problems of access.211 In the Momaths project, for example, “[t] he biggest problem in the project – identified by both teachers and learners – was lack of access for some learners to a suitable mobile telephone.”212 Mobile phones can be prohibitively expensive because of the cost of individuals calls and texts

#ICT4HR

as well as the costs of the handsets themselves. A lack of competition in markets for mobile phone services may allow a few providers to dominate and keep prices high.213 Mobile providers might not serve under-resourced areas.214 In low resource environments, people may find it difficult to obtain power to charge mobile phones. Finally, even where mobile is available, coverage may be limited. For example, due to time constraints, the Uwiano project was only able to arrange a partnership with one mobile service provider, Safaricom, for the SMS messaging system. While Safaricom is the service provider of a large majority of Kenyans there were still some who were not able to participate.215 The ICT4GOV project emphasized the importance of sustainability with respect to technology, especially in terms of cost, noting their efforts to address this issue by using low cost handsets and negotiating special rates with operators to reduce the cost of text messages.

Thus, although mobile phones provide an important starting point for overcoming the digital divide, it is still a resource that is unevenly distributed, and access to mobile devices may be particularly limited in poor or underserved communities. Relying on preexisting access to a particular technology poses the risk of replicating any inequalities that may exist with respect to that technology. The projects surveyed attempted to respond to these problems in several different ways. Piga Simu, for example, sought to minimize the burden of a phone call by offering a call back service.217 Voix des Kivus provided the technology, both the mobile phones themselves as well as a solar panel to recharge the phones.218 The ICT4GOV project in South Kivu emphasized the importance of ensuring that SMS messaging provided a complementary channel, not a substitute channel, for other means of communication, such as working with civil society organizations on the local level as well as local leaders.219

|ndex

Inequalities in access to a particular technology may also exist within particular communities. In other words, the digital divide is not only geographic but can occur along the lines of race, gender, age, and disability.220 In some places, for example, the use of mobile phones may reinforce gender inequalities. For example, a women-run community based radio project in Southeast Kenya chose radio

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

25

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

over cell phones after conversations revealed that women felt their husbands would take and sell a cell phone; they were provided with solar powered rechargers for their radio interfaces because they did not have access to household finances necessary to purchase batteries.221 Voix des Kivus sought to avoid replicating existing inequalities by providing one phone to the village chief, a second to the head of the village women’s association, and a third to someone elected by the village community.222 The project chose these individuals because they were typical sources of information in a village and provided a balance of power.223

|ndex

Lack of literacy can also create a barrier to the use of particular technologies. For example, SMS messaging requires a basic level of literacy. Piga Simu decided to use a voice-based system because it is easier to access by vulnerable populations who may not be able to write.224 A mobile project in Afghanistan changed its plans to use SMS to deliver information about markets and commodities to farmers to a call back function because of low levels of literacy.225 At the same time, lack of literacy does not mean that text is always not useful.

For example, a later survey of the farmers in the Afghanistan project indicated that they wanted the SMS in addition to voice messages because they could show the SMS market quote to potential buyers and gain leverage during negotiations.226 Language can also create barriers. Piga Simu offers a call back function in part so that women can request information in a language of their choice.227 Individuals may also be unable to access particular technology because of a lack of technical literacy. Many of the projects surveyed invested time in educating participants on the use of the relevant technologies. In Voix des Kivus, for example, phone holders were given extensive training on the system’s operations, provided with a ‘code sheet,’ and trained how to send and use SMS messages.228 In Map Kibera, one resident from each village in Kibera was recruited and given training in different ICTs.229 Participants in Kibera News Network were given weekly classes on how to use Flip Video cameras and editing software and they were given practice assignments to improve their skills.230

26

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

Finally, cultural perceptions of technology may also create barriers to access. In Map Kibera, for example, project organizers found that individuals did not view technology as participatory but rather saw online content as something to be passively consumed.231 As a result, Map Kibera did outreach specifically about the value of the technology: “Many Kiberans who asked what the mappers were doing did not see how a map available only online could benefit them or their community—besides which, they already knew how to get around.”232 SJS similarly said that it can be difficult to convince people of the value added of technology to do things they are already doing.233 The Uchaguzi project indicates that sequencing might be one way to help foster technical literacy and comfort with a particular technology. In that case, the community mapping project provided a foundation for later projects, such as community news and issue specific mapping. Sequencing is not a necessary prerequisite but may be a way to introduce a technology and get people engaged.234

D.

Response

Projects using new technologies may find it particularly challenging to transform information into action. Although it is impossible to evaluate systematically, some of the projects provided at least anecdotal evidence of actions that resulted from their information. Uwiano relayed information to the police about reports of a planned vigilante action, and the police responded and were able to make arrests.235 Uchaguzi sent reports about a polling place that was displaying misleading information to the local electoral commission, and the commission was able to remedy the problem.236 Other projects were not able to provide even examples, however. The Voix des Kivus research team, for example, concluded that “we know of no instances in which development or humanitarian agencies responded to incidents or issues raised by phone holders, and of no serious attempts to integrate the data into operations.”237 There are three reasons it may be difficult to generate a response in projects involving new technologies. First, collecting information by mobile

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

phone and via new techniques like crowdsourcing can generate a significant volume of information.

Much of the information generated will simply be irrelevant. Organizations need to have the ability to manage and process the information, identifying and isolating the relevant data, and that requires both human and financial resources.238 The volume of information generated may also inhibit the ability to find a local partner, since each potential partner is interested in only part of the data set.239 The cases studied employed several techniques in managing incoming data. Uwiano, for example, limited the information it collected in order to handle the volume it was receiving leading up to the election.240 It also engaged in “triage” of the incoming reports, organizing reports into six categories— informative, threat, positive message, hate speech, coded message, or incitement to violence—in order to identify those that required a response.241 Uwiano did a full analysis of only 300 of the 14,000 submitted reports.242 Crowdseeding also aids in the management of incoming data by limiting the number of reporters. In the Voix des Kivus project, for example, the team only had to process reports from three individuals in each village.243 Projects are also using technology to filter. Medic Mobile, for example, is developing technology that can be used “to auto-categorise messages sent from healthcare workers in the field. The idea is to catch symptoms across a number of languages and spellings (or misspellings) to detect outbreaks of diseases or hotspots for HIV/Aids, for example.”244

#ICT4HR

Second, transforming information into action is challenging if the information is not tailored to local needs. The Voix des Kivus research team, for example, concluded that the one thing they would change, had they to do it over again, would be to “make Voix des Kivus a central part of an NGO.”245 Although the research team established relationships with local organizations, these partners were not involved in the conception, planning and implementation of the project. The lack of involvement in the planning and implementation of the project meant that the information that was being generated was not integrated into or tailored to the goals and priorities of local organizations.246 Jessica Heinzelman also noted that although Uchaguzi was able to get the information it received to partners with the capacity to act, she would have put even more time into forming these relationships.247 Third, transforming information into action requires that the local partner organization have the capacity to make use of the information. Erica Hagen, for example, said that for issue mapping to be successful, the mapping project has to work with grassroots organizations to invest in helping people make use of the information.248 Rachel Brown recommended planning the ICT project with local leadership and community organizations because they have the knowledge and capital to guide any intervention.249 Local partners are more likely to be trusted and thereby able to convince community members to act on information than when that information comes from a source they do not know.250

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

|ndex

27

#ICT4HR

|ndex

28

NOV EMBER 2012

Navigating the Opportunities and Risks of New Technologies

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

V. Recommendations

N

ew technologies offer the potential to reduce the opportunity costs of reporting, advocacy, and data collection, enable the inclusion of a wider range of peoples and groups in human rights work, support better and more participatory development practices, and help governments understand the needs and priorities of their citizens. Each of these possible benefits, however, gives rise to new risks and challenges. Larger volumes of information make it difficult to ensure accuracy and to identify relevant information. The use of new technologies can also exacerbate inequality and security risks.

Information must also be translated into action.

Although the Voix des Kivus case study indicates that participants may have valued participation in and of itself, they also participated because they continued to maintain the hope that their information would lead to concrete benefits for the community.

This section of the report presents several recommendations for projects seeking to employ new technologies in promoting human rights. It does not provide recommendations for using ICTs generally, nor does it go into specifics about issues such as security or data management. Rather, the purpose of this section is to identify the types of questions that might be asked at the outset of such a project and some of the tensions behind each of these questions.

1. Build verification mechanisms into the activity and ensure they are tailored to project goals.

There are a range of mechanisms available for verifying information submitted by ordinary individuals though mechanisms like crowdsourcing.

The particular choice of mechanism will depend on the needs of the particular activity. Professional researchers may be needed if the information will be used in a human rights report, where credibility is key; even then, however, these researchers could use information provided by crowdsourcing projects to identify questions or provide corroboration.251

As Alston notes, for example, “crowdsourcing could certainly be used by organizations (e.g., national human rights institutions, ombudsmen, non-governmental organizations) to receive notifications of alleged abuses which could then be tracked and investigated.”252 To the extent new technologies are used for other purposes— whether as a mechanism for ascertaining trends or simply for expression—less rigorous verification protocols may be necessary.253 For example, while a project designed to solicit information about the performance of local service organizations may be overly politicized, a project designed to collect information about their work may be more feasible.254 A central tension in choosing a verification mechanism is the risk that this mechanism will undermine or eliminate the very advantages provided by new methods of generating information about human rights issues. One of the most important advantages of these new approaches is cost; crowdsourcing can generate a significant amount of information about broad range of activities over a wide geographic area at a fraction of the cost of traditional methods of investigation. At the same time, the costs of verifying and managing that volume of information can eliminate any cost savings achieved in generating the information in the first place. Voix des Kivus, for example, decided not to employ more intensive verification because doing so would defeat the advantages presented by crowdsourcing; a field coordinator sent to verify individual reports on a bi-weekly basis could just as easily gather the information himself.255

|ndex

2. Establish appropriate security protocols.

In an ideal world, projects should evaluate security risks to participants and researchers at the outset, adopt and implement appropriate protocols for minimizing the risk, and consider abandoning the project where it would not be possible to achieve an appropriate level of risk. It T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

29

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

is, however, very difficult in the abstract to say how projects such evaluate risk, what levels of risk are acceptable, and how that risk should be minimized.

Based on the cases studied, however, a few general observations are in order.

First, even information commonly understood to be “public” can create unintended risks when collected and disseminated online. In mapping the health resources in the community, for example, Map Kibera participants wanted to include chemists, individuals who dispense medication and provide other health services. Some of the chemists were unlicensed, however, and might be shut down by the government if discovered. There was also a concern that mapping youth hangouts could lead to a police crackdown.256 Although all of this information was publicly available and known to the community, gathering it all in one place and publishing it in an online map would make it easier for the government to take action against these groups. |ndex

On the one hand, it is reasonable to assume that public information raises fewer security concerns.

The person affected by the information has already made a decision to release it, or even if not released under their authority, whatever harm might occur from publication has likely already been done.

Indeed, regulations for human subjects review often make this very distinction. Although projects involving research with humans must go through a separate review process,257 there is generally an exception for collecting public information.258 That said, it is not always the case that the collection and dissemination of information, even information that is already “public,” does not lead to harm. Information that is common knowledge in the local community make take on a very different meaning and have very different consequences if released more widely and in a context and form other than that which was originally anticipated or intended. Crowdsourcing projects are likely to encounter this tension and may want to anticipate the position they will take on “public” information and how they will draw the line between public and non-public information.

Second, it will be difficult to decide who should make decisions about risks. There was considerable variation in the projects in terms of who assumed

30

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

authority for assessing risk. In Voix des Kivus, the phone holders made their own decisions about how to rate the security risk of the information they were gathering and were given no guidance about how to do so.259 The research team, however, edited the texts for security; indeed, the team felt uncomfortable being put in the position of “censors,” deciding who would receive what information, and tried to get the community to take over in this regard, but the community continually deferred to the research team.260 In Map Kibera, the mapping team decided whether to include the chemists and youth hangouts; individual conversations between the mappers and the chemists may have taken place about the risks.261 Sisi ni Amani plans to engage community in process of making decisions about who will have access to what information.262 The Uchaguzi project attended less to security concerns because they viewed the participants as volunteers who could assess the risks themselves.263 There is a good deal to be said for allowing those affected by a project make decisions about risk. They are often in the best position to assess the risk to themselves.264 That said, informed consent models may be particularly challenging in the context of crowdsourcing projects involving new technologies. It can be difficult to obtain informed consent even in the best of circumstances. It is that much more difficult in a low-resource setting, complicated by social, cultural, and language barriers as well as a lack of familiarity with the nature of the technical risk involved.265 The desire of individuals in vulnerable circumstances “to have their ‘stories’ told to the international community can outweigh consideration of the potential danger to themselves and their communities.”266 Further, the digital environment has radically changed expectations about how quickly and how far something might be shared. Information, once shared, is easily shared again and remixed, and it may not be possible to guarantee to a participant that his or her information will not be used for other purposes. Crowdsourcing projects are unlikely to be able to identify participants in advance, and the volume of participants might make it difficult to ensure that the proper information has been conveyed and understood.267

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

Third, mobile crowdsourcing projects may need to be particularly cautious about managing expectations. Providing a means for gathering information can create expectations that the information will be provided to those who can respond and that response will be forthcoming.

Participants should not view a SMS platform as a “911” line.268 In Voix des Kivus, for example, the project would often get reports that were requests, “for support with a health clinic, for support with schooling.”269 Even the most rigorous of disclosures, however, may not be enough to dispel expectations. Although the Voix des Kivus research team explained in the clearest of terms that the project had a research purpose and that participants should not expect that anything would come of the information, expectations persisted: “There was inevitably a hope that if information about the situation of these villages gets out to the world that someone will answer.”270 When asked why they continued to participate despite the lack of any response, the villagers said they knew they shouldn’t expect a response, but they continued to take part because it at least kept the possibility of a response open.271 Fourth, there is a tension between the conservatism of risk minimization and the underlying orientation of many of the innovators operating to employ new ICTs in furtherance of human rights, development, and humanitarian goals. This observation is not to critique either approach. Rather, it is simply to observe that the values of the technology field—a willingness to experiment and “to fail, adopt, and iterate”272— can be in some tension with the need to develop considered and reasoned security protocols ahead of time. In other works, while hacking is an iterative process, security is not.

This tension appears most acutely in questions about open data. On the one hand, making data available (or “open”) may help further other projects and could lead to new uses of the data that the original generators could not have foreseen.

The data collected from Map Kibera, for example, is available to be used as long as any subsequent uses are also shared.273 AAAS often tries to make its full satellite imagery and analysis available through a Google Earth layer so that other groups

#ICT4HR

can use the information and check the AAAS’s results.274 Depending on the project, however, there may be human rights risks associated with allowing others to use this data. At the same time, the technology values of openness may be in some tension with concerns about the uses of sensitive data. Uchaguzi, for example, decided to make its data open not only because the project itself was a response to the lack of open information about the electoral process, but also because it reflected the belief that “the opportunity to have your voice heard is more important than unexpected consequences.”275 A report on human rights and video security put it this way: “Human rights needs, for example understanding how consent is secured from video participants, can come into conflict with the assumption of engineers and user experience specialists in social media companies, that content and identity must be spread with as little ‘friction’ as possible.”276 At the same time, a conservative approach with respect to risk might hinder project innovation.

The Voix des Kivus research team, for example, cited several instances in which their caution as researchers and desire to avoid any risk to participants prevented them from introducing innovations that might have led the project to have more of an impact on the ground. For example, their concern about security risks led them to decide not to share information between villages, even though sharing of information could have fostered the development of advocacy networks.277

|ndex

3. Consider developing ethical protocols for crowdsourcing in the human rights context.

One of the most fundamental challenges facing mobile crowdsourced projects in the human rights context is how to treat the sources who are contributing information. Citizen reporters fall somewhere in between the roles of journalist, human rights researcher, researcher, and ordinary observer. In some ways, it is their role as nonprofessionals that provides value to crowdsourced projects, generating information that could not be gathered if the activity were limited to those with credentials. At the same time, it presents risks. They do not have the training they need to recognize risks to others and to take measures to minimize those

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

31

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

risks, to protect their own and others’ security, and to ensure the accuracy of the information they gather.278 Without a professional role, they also lack access to a set of professional standards that would help them sort through questions about security and risk.

|ndex

An important first step would be to recognize that individuals who collect information—even if they are not professionals—are nonetheless acting in a kind of professional capacity and could likely benefit from training and guidance about how to exercise judgment in that capacity. The cases studied tended to treat trusted sources as participants, not researchers. Voix des Kivus, for example, developed protocols to protect the security of phone holders but not for other participants. The research team edited the texts for security and protected the disclosure of sensitive information, and some phone holders themselves withheld sensitive information—for example, they would not report incidents of sexual violence if the source asked them not to.279 At the same time, most of the phone holders appear to have been acting as researchers, going out and collecting information rather than waiting for individuals to approach them.280 As such, they might have benefited from training on how to collect information, protect sources, or avoid secondary trauma.

Despite the difficulties of applying concepts of informed consent in the crowdsourced context, projects should also consider methods for communicating to sources—the victims and witnesses from whom information is gathered—the way their information will be used and any associated risks.281 To the extent that trusted sources are affirmatively going out and collecting information, they are acting as researchers and are subject to ethical constraints in that process. It is true that in some instances, researchers may need to exercise independent judgment about risks to the victims and witnesses with whom they work. Nonetheless, this should only happen when efforts to obtain informed consent have failed or are impracticable.282 In addition, clearer discussions about the relationship between researcher and source will help ensure this judgment is exercised consistently.

Finally, we recommend that human rights professionals, medical researchers, and technology innovators collaborate in developing a set of ethical principles that could be used to guide

32

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

projects that employ ordinary individuals in the collection of information.283 A set of guidelines developed specifically for this context is preferable to adopting an existing set for two reasons. First, it not clear which set of professional standards would be most appropriate—whether canons of journalistic ethics, human rights research training protocols, human subjects research standards, or others.284 Indeed, the choice could even vary from project to project. A separate set of standards for crowdsourcing (in all its variations) may provide more flexibility to tailor ethical considerations and security protocols to the particular context. Second, some of these standards may be too conservative in many cases, impossible to apply, and risk of eliminating the very advantages of having citizens, not professionals, gathering information. A set of ethical standards for crowdsourcing could be tailored and flexible while nonetheless providing at the very least a framework for decision making about risk that would ensure greater consistency and transparency. Further, standards for ethical documentation do not need to be limited to a static list, but could instead be incorporated into “site governance and review policies” of online platforms that handle human rights content, embodied in learning and training materials, as well as built into the technological documentation tools themselves.285

4. Establish partnerships with local organizations able to respond to information flows.

Projects should also consider involving local organizations from the very beginning and ensuring that these organizations are able to act on the information being generated by the project.

Involving local partners from the beginning will help ensure that outputs are tailored to the information needs of the community. In other words, “technology has to support what local people are trying to do” rather than the other way around.286 Thomas Maketa of the ICT4GOV project in South Kivu emphasized, for example, that SMS is not a strategy by itself. In order to foster participation, it is important to build technology into a comprehensive engagement strategy with the local community.287 In some instances, fostering participation may even require low-tech solutions. For example, because a large portion of Kibera residents did not have access

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

to the Internet, Map Kibera made paper print outs of the map and placed them strategically within Kibera.288 Collaboration should be ongoing to aid in responsiveness as needs change. One interviewee also recommended closing the feedback loop by asking authorities to relay back which actions were taken.289 Fostering responsiveness may also help mitigate concerns about sustainability. The Voix des Kivus research team, for example, had been concerned that the lack of response from outside organizations to the information that was being generated would lead to less participation and reporting. They were surprised to find that for these particular communities, the expressive component of the project—the fact that it gave voice to the community’s needs and concerns—provided an incentive despite the lack of response. In the words of one participant, “for the first time, we’re being

#ICT4HR

put on the map.”290 At the same time, participants also noted that they continued to hold out hope that someone would respond to the information they were sharing, and they wanted to keep that possibility open.291 At some point, continued failure to generate a response would likely result in diminished participation and sustainability.

To some extent, these principles are not specific to technology projects. In some sense, that should not be surprising. New technologies are not ends, but tools. They will not themselves foster democratic participation or greater protection of human rights.

Their value depends on the use to which they are put. As Hagen emphasized, “technology is easy; real social change is still the most difficult—and most important—part.”292

|ndex

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

33

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

(Endnotes) 1 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank La Rue, U.N. Doc A/HRC/17/27, ¶ 2 (May 16, 2011) [hereinafter Report of the Special Rapporteur], available at http://w w w 2.ohchr.org/engl i s h/bodi es /hrcouncil/ do c s / 17s e s s i o n /A .H RC .1 7 .2 7 _ e n .p d f.

2

Information and Communication Technologies for Development, Wikipedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_and_communication_technologies_for_development

(last visited June 25, 2012 15:31 GMT).

3 Tommaso Balbo Di Vinadio, World Bank Institute, Information and Communication Technology for Governance (ICT4GOV) Program, World Bank Institute Capacity Development and Results (2012), available at w ww.o p e n d ta .org/Know l edge/ICT4G O V% 20Cas e% 20Study.pdf ; s ee also ICT4Gov.netWork, h ttp ://i c t4 g o v.n e t/ (last visited June 25, 2012).

4 Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Philip Alston, G.A. Res. 65/321, U.N. Doc. A/65/321, at ¶ 5 (Aug. 23, 2010), available at http://dacc essdds - ny. un.o rg /d o c /U N D OC /G E N /N 1 0 /4 92/39/PD F/N 1049239.pdf? .

|ndex

34

5 Id. ¶ 5.

6 Erica Hagen, Mapping Change, Community Information Empowerment in Kibera, 6 Innovations 69, at 92 (2011).

7 OpenLearn LabSpace, ICTs in Everyday Life, http://l abs pace.open.ac.uk/mod/res ource/view. php?id=37 1 9 8 2 (last visited June 25, 2012).

8 Jamie F. Metzl, Information Technology and Human Rights, 18 Hum. Rts. Q. 705, 709 (1996).

9 Social Media, Wikipedia, h ttp ://en.w i ki pedi a.org/w i ki /Soci al _medi a (June 25, 2012 16:30 GMT).

10 See, e.g., Lee Baker, The Unintended Consequences of U.S. Export Restrictions on Software and Online Services for American Foreign Policy and Human Rights, 23 Harv. J. Law & Tech. 537, 556-63 (2010) (discussing the ways in which activists used social media and mobile phones in the Ukraine, Moldova, and Iran, and to circumvent online censorship in China).

11 Albert-László Barabási, Linked: The New Science of Networks 43 (2002).

12 The result is the “small world” phenomenon. See Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations 214 (2009).

13 Manuel Castells, et al., Mobile Communication and Society: A Global Perspective 201 (2007). Because weak ties can form bridges between groups that do not otherwise overlap, “whatever is to be diffused can reach a larger number of people, and traverse greater social distance (i.e., path length), when passed through weak ties rather than strong.” Mark Granovetter, The Strength of Weak Ties, 78 Am. J. Soc. 1360, 1362–64 (1973).

14 Philip N. Howard & Muzammil M. Hussain, The Role of Digital Media, 22 J. Democracy 35, 48 (2011) (noting that one of the advantages of social media is that it provides networks that are “already embedded in trusted networks of family and friends”).

15 Larry Diamond, Liberation Technology, 21 J. Democracy 69, 71 (2010).

16 See, e.g., Dan Hunter & F. Gregory Lastowka, Amateur-to-Amateur, William & Mary L. Rev. 951, 989 (2004) (noting that “cheap digital technologies of authorship are increasingly allowing individual, poorly capitalized players to produce works that are competing for attention with the works created by corporate and highly capitalized players”).

17 Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks 60 (2006).

18 Peer production and user-generated content can overlap but are not identical. Wikipedia, for example, uses a model of peer production to collaboratively produce user-generated content. Linux, in contrast, is peer production by professionals—an effort to create a computer operating system through incremental improvements contributed by computer programmers collaborating together on a volunteer basis. See id. at 65–66.

19 For example, “although in some countries the number of fixed lines has actually declined over the WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

last five years, as of 2009, mobiles were accessible to between 60% and 70% of [Africa’s] population.”

Association for Progressive Communications, ICTs for Democracy: Information and Communication Technologies for the Enhancement of Democracy — with a Focus on Empowerment (2009), available at ht t ps : / /w ww.a p c .o rg /e n /s y s te m /fi l e s /SID A_ICTs + for+ D emocracy.pdf ; see also Leapfrogging: A different route to development, Article 13 (Sep. 2005), available at http://w w w.arti cl e13.com/A13_ P r int a ble P a g e s .a sp ? s trA c ti o n = Ge tP u b l i cati on& PN ID = 1192.

20 Jeff Howe, Crowdsourcing: A Definition, Crowdsourcing, http://crow ds ourci ng.com (last visited July 11, 2012); see also Jeff P. Howe, The Rise of Crowdsourcing, Wired, June 2006, at 176.

21 James Suroweiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds XIII (2004).

22 Uchaguzi: An Ushahidi deployment for Kenya’s 2010 Constitutional Referendum, Ushahidi Blog, h t t p : / / b l o g . u s h a h i d i . c o m / i n d e x . p h p / 2 0 1 0 / 0 8 / 0 2 / u c h a g u z i - a n - u s h a h i d i - d e p l o y m e n t - f o rk e ny a s - 20 1 0 -c o n sti tu ti o n a l -re fe re n d um/ (last visited Aug. 2, 2010).

23 Ushahidi is a “free, open source platform that allows its users to gather distributed data via SMS, email or web and visualize it on a map or timeline.” Marta Poblet, Mobile Governance: Empowering Citizens to Promote the Rule of Law, at http://cros s road.epu.ntua.gr/fi l es /2010/04/34_MPoblet _ M o bile G o v e rn a n c e .p d f (last visited June 30, 2012). Developed in order to aggregate reports about irregularities and incidents of violence during the 2008 Kenyan elections, the initial platform has been expanded into a downloadable and web-based platform that has been used in a variety of contexts.

24 Constitution and Reform Education Consortium (CRECO), Wanjiku’s Decision Referendum 2010, at 9 (2010).

25 Interview by Technology for Transparency Network with Jessica Heinzelman, Uchaguzi Team Member (Dec. 3, 2010), available at h ttp : //trans parency.gl obal v oi ces onl i ne.org/proj ect/uchaguz i ; see also Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, Senior ICT Specialist at DAI and former Non-Technical Project Manager for Uchaguzi (June 7, 2012).

26 See Jessica Heinzelman, Overcoming Challenges of Early Warning and Response Systems: The Promise of Participatory Models 47 (Apr. 2011) (unpublished MALD thesis, The Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, Tufts University).

27 United Nations Development Programme, Voting, Not Violence, in Kenya, http://w w w.undp. or g/

|ndex

c o n t e n t / u n d p / e n / h o m e / o u r w o r k / c r i s i s p r e v e n t i o n a n d r e c o v e r y / s u c c e s s s t o r i e s / Vo t i n g - n o t - v i o l e n c e in- k e ny a . h tm l ; see also E-Mail Interview With Stephen Kirimi, Chief Executive Officer, PeaceNet Kenya (2011).

by SMS, allAfrica.com (Aug. 3, 2010), http://al l afri ca.c om / s t o r ie s / 20 1 0 0 8 0 3 1 0 3 9 .h tml .

29 E-Mail Interview with Stephen Kirimi, supra note 27.

30 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 48–49.

31 Alice Nderitu, Information Partnerships–Building Democracy with Citizens, NGOs and Government: The Uwiano Experience, at 3, available at http://w w w.j umptel l .com/Information_ P a r t ne r s hi p s _ U WIA N O_ A l i c e _ N d e ri tu . pdf . ; UWIANO Platform for Peace, Soul Beat Africa (Sep. 14, 2010), ht t p ://w ww.c o m m i n i t.c o m /a fri c a/content/uw i ano-pl atform-peace . Uwiano was launched by PeaceNet Kenya, an umbrella of community-based organizations, the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC), and the National Steering Committee (NSC) on Peace Building and Conflict Management, and had the support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Id. 32 “[W]e wanted them to be researchers themselves, not merely distributors of knowledge imparted by others.” Hagen, supra note 6, at 75–76.

33 Home, OpenStreetmap.us, h ttp ://w w w.opens treetmap.us / (last visited June 25, 2012).

34 Hagen, supra note 6, at 72–73. The project also uploaded photos to Flickr and linked into OSM. E-Mail from Erica Hagen, Co-Founder, Map Kibera (July 24, 2012).

35 Hagen, supra note 6, at 76, 98.

36 Id. at 86.

37 Id. at 77–78.

28

Kenya:

SOS

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

35

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

E-Mail from Erica Hagen, supra note 34.

About Us, SisiNiAmani.org, h ttp://s i s i ni amani .org/i ndex .php? opti on= com_content& v iew= a r t ic le & id= 2 &Ite m i d = 1 0 (last visited June 25, 2012).

40 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 59–60. Sisi Ni Amani uses Frontline SMS, a SMS platform that “enables users to send, receive and manage SMS over a mobile network.” The Software, Frontline SMS, ht t p://ww w.fro n tl i n e s ms .c o m/th e-s oftw are/ (last visited June 25, 2012). The platform allows organizations to communicate with large groups of ordinary citizens via mobile phone—to receive SMS messages from individual members of the group and send information either to the group or selected individuals. Id. 41 Patrick Meier, Marketing Peace using SMS Mobile Advertising: A New Approach to Conflict Prevention, h ttp ://i R e v o l u ti o n .n e t/2 0 1 2 /06/11/peacetx t-marketi ng-peace (last visited July 10, 2012).

42 Columbia Center for the Study of Development Strategies, Voix des Kivus Leaflet 1, available at h ttp ://c u -c sd s .o rg /w p -c o n t ent/upl oads /2009/10/Voi x -des -Ki v us -Leafl et.pdf.

43 Patrick Meier, From Crowdsourcing Crisis Information to Crowdseeding Conflict Zones, ht t p: / / iR e v o l u ti o n .n e t/2 0 1 2 /0 7 /1 0 /c ro w ds ourci ng-to-crow ds eedi ng (last visited, July 10, 2012).

44 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 1.

45 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, Lead Researcher, Voix des Kivus (June 27, 2011).

46 Id. 47 Peter van der Windt & Macartan Humphreys, Voix des Kivus: Reflections on a Crowdseeding Approach to Conflict Event Data Gathering 5–6 (2012).

48 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, Lead Researcher, Voix des Kivus (June 24, 2012).

49 E-Mail from Macartan Humphreys, Voix des Kivus (July 12, 2012).

50 Freedom Fone enables users “to create and share audio content using Interactive Voice Response (IVR), voicemail and SMS.” How It Works, Freedom Fone, http://w w w.freedomfone.org/page/how- it w o r k s (last visited June 25, 2012). Using Freedom Fone, an organization can create voice menus (e.g., “press 1 for more information about X”), record information, and set up mailboxes to receive messages. Freedom Fone also provides a means for polling and collecting information via SMS. Id. 51 E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, National Coordinator/Deputy President, Si Jeunesse Savait (2011).

52 Id. 53 Id. 54 See h ttp ://ww w.a m n e s ty u s a .o rg/res earch/s ci ence-for-human-ri ghts (last visited July 10, 2012) 55 Id. 56 Combining Crowdsourced Satellite Imagery Analysis with Crisis Reporting: An Update on Syria, 38 39

|ndex

http://blog.standbytaskforce.com/combining-crowdsourced-satellite-imagery-analysis-withc r is is - r e po rti n g -a n -u p d a te -o n -sy ri a (last visited July 10, 2012).

57 AAAS Scientific Responsibility, Human Rights and Law Program, American Association for the Advancement of Science [hereinafter AAAS] (Apr. 2, 2012), http://s rhrl .aaas .org/geotech/.

58 Evidence of Destruction in the Democratic Republic of Congo, AAAS (Mar. 19, 2012), ht t p: / / s hr.a a a s.o rg //g e o te c h /d rc o n g o /d rcongo.s html .

59 World Bank Institute, Case Study: Information and Communication Technology for Governance (ICT4GOV) Program, at 1.

60 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, Governance Specialist, World Bank (July 20, 2012).

61 Id. 62 Id. 63 Telephone Interview with Jenny Torres, Encargada de Investigación, Proceso de Pobreza y Políticas Sociales Centro de Estudios Sociales (2011).

64 About Us, Coalición Educación Digna, http://educaci ondi gna.com/about/ (last visited June 25, 2012).

36

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

65 Id. 66 Republica Dominicana Contaminada, http://domi ni canacontami nada.bl ogs pot.c om / (last visited June 13, 2012).

67 Domivista, Barrick Gold y las Agua Contaminada en RD1, YouTube (Jan. 10, 2010), ht t p: / / w w w.yo u tu b e .c o m/w a tc h ? v= F u MEccv i 9kQ .

68 Jose Maria Cabral, Rep Dominicana - Espejitos por Oro (¡Fuera Barrick Gold de America Latina!), YouTube (May 20, 2011), h ttp ://ww w.y outube.com/w atch? v = hLdkSa4FMmg .

69 Id. 70 Kate Bulkley, Fast, Mobile-Based Messaging Service Boosts Healthcare and Cuts Costs, The Guardian, June 18, 2010.

71 Medic Mobile, h ttp ://me d i c m o bi l e.org / (last visited July 6, 2012).

72 Id. 73 Kevin Asuncion, Text Messages that Save Lives with Josh Nesbit of Medic Mobile, Care2, Aug. 2, 2011, h ttp ://ww w.c a re 2 .c o m /c a u ses /tex t-mes s ages -that-s av e-l i v es -w i th-j os h-nes bi t-of-medicm o bile . ht ml # i x z z 1 U GP IF a Z A (last visited July 6, 2012).

74 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (entered into force Mar. 23, 1976) [hereinafter ICCPR]; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, opened for signature Dec. 16, 1966, 993 U.N.T.S. 3 (entered into force Jan. 3, 1976) [hereinafter ICESCR].

75 International Law, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, http://w w w 2.ohchr.or g/ e ng lis h/ la w /.

76 World Conference on Human Rights, Vienna, Austria, June 14–25, 1993, Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, A/Conf.157/23.

77 See Report of the Special Rapporteur, supra note 1, ¶ 22 (“by acting as a catalyst for individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Internet also facilitates the realization of a range of other rights”).

78 Social Accountability Sourcebook, at 5, World Bank (2006), available at http://w w w.w orl dba nk.

|ndex

o r g / s o c ia la c c o u n ta b i l i ty_ so u rc e b o o k /Pri ntVers i ons /Conceptual % 2006.22.07.pdf.

79 80

ICCPR, art. 19.

Event Mapping in Congo, Columbia Center for the Study of Development Strategies ht t p: / / c u- c sd s .o rg /p ro j e c ts /e ve n t-m a ppi ng-i n-congo/ (last viewed June 25, 2012).

81 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

82 Hagen, supra note 6, at 82.

83 Id. at 84.

84 ICCPR, art. 19.

85 Id. art. 22(1).

86 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Remarks at George Washington University: Internet Rights and Wrongs: Choices & Challenges in a Networked World (Feb. 15, 2011).

87 ICCPR, art. 21.

88 Pillowlita, Ritmos Amarillos: Solidaridad para Educación, YouTube (May 19, 2011), ht t p: / / w w w.y o u tu b e .c o m/w a tc h ? v= VbYaR J 71v es .

89 ICCPR, art. 25.

90 As Hagen explained, bringing a map of water resources to a meeting of water stakeholders makes an impression because that is not information that people necessarily have at their fingertips. Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, Co-Founder, Map Kibera (May 31, 2012).

91 E-Mail Interview with Rachel Brown, Founder & CEO, Sisi Ni Amani (2011).

92 ICESCR, arts. 12(1), 12(2)(d).

93 ECOSOC Resolution 1985/17, Review of the composition, organization and administrative arrangements of the Sessional Working Group of Governmental Experts on the Implementation of the

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

37

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (May 28, 1985).

94 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 14, The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (General Comment No. 14), UN Doc. No. E/C.12/2000/4 (2000), ¶ 11. The right to health is best understood as the right to enjoy “a variety of facilities, goods, services and conditions necessary for the realization of the highest attainable standard of health.” Id. ¶ 9.

95 See N. Mahmud et al., A Text Message-Based Intervention to Bridge the Healthcare Communication Gap in the Rural Developing World, 18(2) Tech & Health Care J. 137 (2010); Asuncion, supra note 73.

96 Bulkley, supra note 70.

97 OpenMRS, About OpenMRS, h t tp://openmrs .org/about/ (last visited July 3, 2012).

98 Wikipedia, mHealth, (as of Jul. 3, 20:12 GMT), http://en.w i ki pedi a.org/w i ki /MH eal th .

99 ICESCR, art. 13(1).

100 Nokia Momaths, Momaths DL Brochure (2011) https ://proj ects .dev el oper.noki a.c om / M o m a t hs / f i l e s/Mo M a th s % 2 0 D L % 2 0 B r ochure% 20-% 20Webs i te.pdf .

101 Riitta Vänskä, United Nations ECOSOC Innovation Fair Survey Response, at 1 (2011) ht t p: / / w w w.u n .o rg /e n /e c o so c /i n n o v fa i r2011/docs /noki a.pdf .

102 Neil Butcher & Associates, Evaluation of the Imfundo yami/yethu Project: Executive Summary (2009) h t t p s : / / p r o j e c t s . d e v e l o p e r. n o k i a . c o m / M o m a t h s / f i l e s / 2 0 0 9 _ 0 9 _ 0 9 % 2 0 I m f u n d o % 2 0 y a m i % 2 0

|ndex

38

y e t hu%20e v a l u a ti o n % 2 0 E xe c u ti ve % 2 0 Summary.pdf . The project used MXit as its social networking service. MXit allows for less expensive communication through the use of internet protocols to send data rather than the more costly SMS service. Christopher M. Napolitano, “MXing it up”: How African adolescents may affect social change through mobile phone use, 128 New Directions in Youth Development 105, 108-109 (2010).

103 Nokia Momaths, supra note 100.

104 Id. 105 ICESCR, art. 13(2)(a)-(b).

106 Id. art. 13(2)(d).

107 Hagen, supra note 6, at 74, 77.

108 ICESCR, art. 11(1).

109 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 3.

110 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

111 E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

112 ICCPR, art. 2(1); United Nations, Comm. on Econ., Soc. & Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 21: Right of Everyone to Take Part in Cultural Life (Art. 15, Para. 1 (a), of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), ¶ 34, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/GC/21 (Dec. 21, 2009).

113 See, e.g., General Comment No. 21, supra note 112, ¶ 48.

114 United Nations, Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 31 (The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant), ¶ 7, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 (May 26, 2004); see also United Nations, Comm. on Econ., Soc. & Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 3: The Nature of States Parties Obligations (Art. 2, Para. 1 of the Covenant), ¶ 7, U.N. Doc. E/1991/23 (Dec. 14, 1990).

115 General Comment No. 21, supra note 112, ¶ 48.

116 Report of the Special Representation of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, John Ruggie, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/14/27, ¶ 1 (Apr. 9, 2010).

117 Claude E. Welch, Jr., Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch: A Comparison, in NGOs and Human Rights: Promise and Performance 85, 107 (Claude E. Welch, Jr. ed., 2001).

118 Alston, supra note 4, ¶ 4.

119 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, Senior ICT Specialist at DAI and former NonTechnical Project Manager for Uchaguzi (2011).

120 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 35.

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

121 Crowdsourcing might also be used to reduce the costs of information analysis. The AAAS, for example, suggested that projects that require the analysis of very large areas could employ “the crowd” to compare time sequenced satellite images to identify changes on the ground. Although the project would have to be supervised by a trained professional, the comparison would not require expertise and could be performed using crowdsourcing. Telephone Interview with Susan Wolfinbarger, Senior Program Associate, Scientific Responsibility, Human Rights, and Law Program, AAAS (June 13, 2012).

122 DR Congo: Civilian Cost of Military Operation is Unacceptable, Human Rights Watch (Oct. 13, 2009), ht t p ://ww w.h rw.o rg /e n /n o d e /8 6 048 (“The coalition urged diplomats and UN officials, who are due to meet in Washington, DC, this week to discuss the situation in eastern Congo and the wider region, to take immediate steps to increase protection for civilians.”).

123 Clay Shirky, The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change, 90 Foreign Affairs 28, 29-30 (2011); see generally Howard & Hussain, supra note 14.

124 See, e.g., Herman Wasserman, Connecting African Activism with Global Networks: ICTs and South African Social Movements, 30 Africa Development 163, 164–65 (2005).

125 Interview with Jenny Torres, supra note 63.

126 Telephone Interview with Jose Delio Area Garcia, Post-Producer and Editor for “Mirrors for Gold” (2011).

127 Wasserman, supra note 124, at 165.

128 Nadine Jurrat,Citizen Journalism and the Internet,Open Society Foundations Reference Series No.4 12 (2011) (discussing the role played by the images of Neda Agha Soltan in Iran’s opposition movement).

129 Sameer Padania et al., Cameras Everywhere: Current Challenges and Opportunities at the Intersection of Human Rights, Video and Technology 18 (2011), available at ht t p: / / w w w.wi tn e s s .o rg /c a me ra s -e ve ryw here/report-2011/tabl e-of-contents .

|ndex

130 Micah White, Clicktivism is Ruining Leftist Activism, The Guardian (Aug. 12, 2010), http: / / w w w. g ua r d i a n .c o .u k /c o m m e n ti sfre e /2 010/aug/12/cl i ckti v i s m-rui ni ng-l efti s t-acti v i s m .

131 See Molly Land, Networked Activism, 22 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 205, 214, 221 (2009).

132 See, e.g., Malcom Gladwell, Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, The New Yorker (2010) (“Social networks are effective at increasing participation—by lessening the level of motivation that participation requires.”); Land, supra note 131, at 206 (“Online human rights activism thus seems faced with two equally unsatisfactory choices—involving many individuals in ways that are meaningful but potentially of limited efficacy, or professionalization and its associated disadvantages.”)..

133 Land, supra note 131, at 232.

134 Gladwell, supra note 132 (“Because networks don’t have a centralized leadership structure and clear lines of authority, they have real difficulty reaching consensus and setting goals.”).

135 See generally Shirky, supra note 12.

136 Kenneth Roth, New Laws Needed to Protect Social Media, Globalpost (Apr. 14, 2011), http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/opinion/110413/facebook-twitter-social-media-revolution

(“Social media makes possible a seemingly leaderless revolution, which cannot be so easily decapitated.”).

137 Sarah Joseph, Social Media, Political Change, and Human Rights, 35 B.C. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 145, 165 (2012).

138 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, Lead Researcher, Voix des Kivus (2011).

139 Hagen, supra note 6, at 100.

140 See generally Linda Mayoux, Evaluation and Impact Research for Rights-Based Development: Issues and Challenges (2007) (surveying some of the challenges associated with both evidence-based and participatory methods of evaluation).

141 Joseph, supra note 137. There are also several studies that focus on the effect of online participation opportunities on political engagement. See, e.g., Georg Aichholzer & Doris Allhutter, Online Forms of Political Participation and Their Impact on Democracy, Institute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, at 12–13 (2011), available at http://epub.oeaw.ac.at/i ta/i ta-manus cri pt/i ta_11_02 . pdf T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

39

#ICT4HR

NOV EMBER 2012

(surveying studies examining correlations between the availability of political information online and opportunities for online participation with voting, political donations, and voter turnout, among other measures of political participation).

142 Social Accountability Sourcebook, supra note 78, at 6 (listing, as examples, “public demonstrations, protests, advocacy campaigns, investigative journalism, and public interest lawsuits”).

143 Id.; see also John M. Ackerman, Social Accountability in the Public Sector, at 1, available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPCENG/214574-1116506074750/20542263/ FI NA L A c k e rm a n .p d f (citing Carmen Malena et al., Social Accountability: An Introduction to the

|ndex

Concept and Emerging Practice (2004) available at http://s i teres ources .w orl dbank.org/IN TPCE NG/ 214578-1116499844371/20524122/310420PAPER0So1ity0SDP0Civic0no1076.pdf (defining social accountability as “an approach towards building accountability that relies on civic engagement, i.e. in which it is ordinary citizens and/or civil society organizations who participate directly or indirectly in exacting accountability”)); see generally Dena Ringold et al., Citizens and Service Delivery (2011).

144 E-Mail Interview With Stephen Kirimi, supra note 27.

145 See, e.g., Diane F. Orentlicher, Bearing Witness: The Art and Science of Human Rights Fact-Finding, 3 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 83, 91 (1990) (describing the attacks of the Regan administration on HRW’s reporting of abuses in El Salvador); see also Ann Marie Clark, “A Calendar of Abuses”: Amnesty International’s Campaign on Guatemala, in NGOs and Human Rights: Promise and Performance 55, 62 (Claude E. Welch, Jr. ed., 2001) (describing the response of the Guatemalan government to AI’s 1979 report on human rights abuses in Guatemala calling the information “fabulous tales”).

146 See, e.g., William Korey, NGOs and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 346 (2001).

147 Howard & Hussain, supra note 14, at 43.

148 Joshua Goldstein & Juliana Rotich, Digitally Networked Technology in Kenya’s 2007–2008 PostElection Crisis, at 4 (2008), available at http://cy ber.l aw.harv ard.edu/s i tes /cy ber.l aw.harv ard.edu/ f ile s / G o ldste i n & Ro ti c h _ D i g i ta l l y_ N e tworked_Technol ogy _Keny as _Cri s i s .pdf.pdf ; see also Caroline Hargreaves & Sanjana Hattotuwa, ICTs For the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes, at 1 (2010), available at h t t p : / / i c t 4 p e a c e . o r g / w p - c o n t e n t / u p l o a d s / 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 / I C Ts - f o r- t h e - P r e v e n t i o n - o f - M a s s - A t r o c i t y C r im e s 1. p d f (noting that “new media, it can be argued, gives even more pervasive and persuasive tools for

misinformation, disinformation, partisan propaganda and hate speech”).

149 Goldstein & Rotich, supra note 148, at 1.

150 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90.

151 Id. 152 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

153 Padania et al., supra note 129, at 26; see also Sam Gregory, Cameras Everywhere: Ubiquitous Video Documentation of Human Rights, New Forms of Video Advocacy, and Considerations of Safety, Security, Dignity and Consent, 2(2) J. Hum. Rts. Practice 191, 202 (2010) (noting that “the possibilities for remixing, re-appropriation and recirculation” can “pull the material farther and farther from its source testifier and/or witness and from its original context – even as that process of translation may increase the chances that the footage will find an audience (even an unexpected one) that may be willing and able to respond”).

154 Patrick Meier, Information Forensics: Five Case Studies on How to Verify Crowdsourced Information from Social Media, available at h ttp ://i R e v o l u ti on.net/2011/11/29/i nformati on-forens i cs -fi v e-cas e-s tud ies ; see also Jessica Heinzelman & Patrick Meier, Crowdsourcing for Human Rights Monitoring: Challenges and Opportunities for Information Collection and Verification, in Human Rights and Information Communication Technologies: Trends and Consequences of Use 123 (J. Lannon & E.F. Halpin eds. 2012). Curation is the process of presenting, in one place, information judged reliable based on triangulation or investigation. Rohit Bhargava, Manifesto For The Content Curator: The Next Big Social Media Job of The Future?, Influential Marketing Blog (Sept. 30, 2009), h ttp ://ro h i tb h a rg a v a.ty pepad.com/w ebl og/2009/09/mani fes to-for-the-cont ent c ur a t o r- t he -n e xt-b i g -s o c i a l -m e d i a -j o b -of-the-future-.html.

40

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

155 Patrick Meier, Why Bounded Crowdsourcing is Important for Crisis Mapping and Beyond, ht t p: / / iR e v o l u ti o n .n e t/2 0 1 1 /1 2 /0 7 /wh y -bounded-crow ds ourci ng (last visited July 10, 2012).

156 E-Mail from Peter van der Windt, Lead Researcher, Voix des Kivus (July 12, 2012); see also Patrick Meier, From Crowdsourcing Crisis Information to Crowdseeding Conflict Zones (Updated), iRevolution (July 10, 2012).

157 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 2.

158 Patrick Meier,Verifying Crowdsourced Social Media Reports for Live Crisis Mapping:An Introduction to Information Forensics, at 9 (2011), available at http://i rev ol uti on.fi l es .w ordpres s .com/2011 / 11/ m e ie r- v e r i fy i n g -c ro w d so u rc e d -d a ta -c as e-s tudi es .pdf (noting that it is possible to investigate the identity, associates and previous activity of the reporter).

159 Snowball sampling is a form of bounded crowdsourcing in which trusted reporters recommend others. As such, this approach provides a means to expand the network of trusted sources. Id. at 8.

160 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 4.

161 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 2.

162 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 4; see also van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 2.

163 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 4.

164 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

165 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

166 Meier, supra note 158, at 14.

167 Molly Beutz Land, Peer Producing Human Rights, 46:4 Alberta L. Rev. 1115, 1132 (2009).

168 Id. 169 CRECO, supra note 24, at 10. The project claimed a 90% verification rate. Id. at 13.

170 Hagen, supra note 6, at 81.

171 Meier, supra note 158, at 13.

172 E-Mail Interview with Stephen Kirimi, supra note 29.

173 Id. 174 Hagen, supra note 6, at 81.

175 Technology for Transparency Network Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

176 Id. Although none of the projects employed this technique, verification can also be crowdsourced.

For example, a group of activists in Southern Kyrgyzstan responded to misinformation distributed via SMS and YouTube by checking with a trusted network of contacts on Skype. Meier, supra note 158, at 12.

177 The coordinator would have a list of the information submitted by the three phoneholders and would meet with each reporter to determine if the message corresponded to what he or she intended to say.

The coordinator would also meet with others to learn if the events actually took place. E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

178 van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 4.

179 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 63.

180 Id. 181 Padania et al., supra note 129, at 22 (noting that “new technologies have made it simpler for human rights defenders (HRDs) and others to record and report violations, but harder for them to do so securely”).

182 Id. at 25.

183 Gregory, supra note 153, at 203.

184 Eric Schmidt & Jared Cohen, The Digital Disruption: Connectivity and the Diffusion of Power, 89 Foreign Affairs 75, 77 (2010); see also Fred Pretrossian, Iranian Officials ‘Crowd-Source’ Protestor’s Identities Online, GlobalVoiceOnline.org (June 27, 2009), http://gl obal v oi ces onl i ne.org/2009/06/ 27/

#ICT4HR

|ndex

ir a nia n- o f f i c i a l s -c ro w d -so u rc e -p ro te ster-i denti ti es -onl i ne/.

185 Gregory, supra note 153, at 201–02.

186 “All content and communications, including visual media, leave personal digital traces that third parties can harvest, link and exploit. Hostile governments, in particular, can use photo and video data T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

41

#ICT4HR

|ndex

NOV EMBER 2012

—particularly that linked with social networking data—to identify track and target activists within their countries, facilitated by the growth of automatic face-detection and recognition software.” Padania et al., supra note 129, at 12.

187 “In general, it is easier to be located and identified, and simpler to have your communications intercepted on mobile devices than it is on the internet.” Id. at 22; see also Telephone Interview with Erika Smith, Women’s Rights Project Associate, Association for Progressive Communications Women’s Network Supporting Program (June 21, 2012).

188 Telephone Interview with Susan Wolfinbarger, supra note 121.

189 Hagen, supra note 6, at 85.

190 See Christian Kelleher et al., The Human Rights Documentation Initiative at the University of Texas Libraries, 15 New Review of Information Networking 94 (2010).

191 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

192 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 76.

193 Id. 194 Id. at 62. Access to information might be limited through segmentation and password protection of the technical platforms as well as limited permissions for downloading, removing, or modifying data. Id. at 77.

195 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 3.

196 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

197 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

198 E-mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

199 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

200 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 84.

201 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

202 Id. 203 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 77.

204 Id. 205 See Aichholzer & Allhutter, supra note 141, at 12–13.

206 Map Kibera, for example, was initially only available online but few people accessed it because they lacked an Internet connection. A later deployment included a mobile phone browser version that allowed individuals to submit and view reports by web-enabled phone. Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, Co-Founder, Map Kibera (2011).

207 Tom Sarrazin, Texting, Tweeting, Mobile Internet: New Platforms for Democratic Debate in Africa, fesMedia Africa Series 1, 17 (2011), available at http://l i brary.fes .de/pdf-fi l es /bueros /afr icam e dia / 083 4 3 .p d f .

208 Quarterly Sector Statistics Report: 1st Quarter July-Sept 2011/2012, Communications Commission of Kenya (2011), available at h ttp ://ww w.cck.go.ke/res c/dow nl oads /SECTO R _STATISTICS_R EPORT_ Q 1_ 11- 12.p d f .

209 E-Mail Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 32.

210 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

211 Sarrazin, supra note 207, at 16.

212 Vänskä, supra note 101, at 4.

213 Sarrazin, supra note 207, at 16.

214 Jamie M. Zimmerman & Sascha Meinrath, Mobile Phones Will Not Save the Poorest of the Poor, Slate (Feb. 9, 2012), h ttp ://ww w.s l a te .c om/arti cl es /technol ogy /future_tens e/2012/02/m_pes a_and_ o t he r _ ic t 4 d _ p ro j e c ts _ a re _ l e a vi n g _ b e hi nd_the_dev el opi ng_w orl d_s _poores t_peopl e_.s i ngl e.htm l.

215 216 217 218 42

E-Mail Interview with Stephen Kirimi, supra note 29.

Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 4.

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

#ICT4HR

219 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

220 Report of the Special Rapporteur, supra note 1, ¶ 61; see also Wasserman, supra note 124, at 174.

221 S. Revi Sterling, AIR: Advancement through Interactive Radio, at 4 (2007), available at ht t p: / / w w w.c s .c o l o ra d o .e d u /d e p a rtm e nt/publ i cati ons /reports /docs /CU -CS-1006-06.pdf.

222 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 2.

223 Id. at 4.

224 E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

225 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

226 Id. 227 E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

228 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 2.

229 Hagen, supra note 6, at 72.

230 Id. at 83.

231 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 206 (users “saw web not as participatory tool for change but as a way to seek information and chat with friends”).

232 Hagen, supra note 6, at 75.

233 E-Mail Interview with Françoise Mukuku, supra note 51.

234 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90.

235 Preventing Violence — Lessons from the Kenyan Constitution Referendum — Peace Watch 8/2010, Kubatana.net (Aug. 13, 2010), h ttp://w w w.kubatana.net/html /archi v e/l egi s l /100813v erit as. a s p?s e c t o r= L E GIS L .

236 Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

237 van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 6.

238 See Tom Mclean, Not with a Bang but a Whimper: The Politics of Accountability and Open Data in the UK, at 11, available at h ttp ://p a p ers .s s rn.com/s ol 3/papers .cfm? abs tract_i d= 1899790 (2011) (concluding that, in the context of the UK’s open data initiative, that although technology has reduced the costs of accessing data, costs of interpreting and using that data remained prohibitively high).

239 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

240 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 74.

241 Kenya SOS by SMS, IRIN Africa (Aug. 3, 2010), http://w w w.i ri nnew s .org/R eport/900 50/

|ndex

K ENYA - SO S -b y -S MS .

242 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 48–49; see also E-Mail Interview with Stephen Kirimi, supra note 29.

Uwiano received 14,000 messages in the three weeks leading up to the referendum, and another 6,000 on the day itself. Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 47.

243 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

244 Bulkley, supra note 70.

245 E-mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

246 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 8.

247 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

248 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90. An analysis of the UN’s early warning mechanism from 1997 succinctly noted: “The UN’s problem is not the absence of information. Rather, it is the absence of an organization to manage the information flow, linking early warning to the other processes crucial to rapid reaction. To be effective, this early warning mechanism must be linked to individuals and organizations capable of acting on such information.” George Bowers, The United Nations— Enhancing Its Early-Warning Mechanism iii (1997).

249 E-Mail Interview with Rachel Brown, supra note 91.

250 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

251 Land, supra note 167, at 1131–32.

252 Alston, supra note 4, ¶ 6; see also Beutz Land, supra note 167, at 1131-35 (describing how amateurs T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

43

#ICT4HR

|ndex

44

NOV EMBER 2012

and professionals could work together to produce human rights reports).

253 In describing uses of Frontline SMS, Alston notes it “can be used as an early warning system, or to track patterns of violence or the effects of a natural disaster, or to facilitate rapid response or service delivery. Crisis mapping can provide important visual representation of events, facilitating more effective strategic planning or advocacy.” Id. 254 Grassrootsalquds.net, for example, provides an interface that allows organizations operating in Jerusalem to provide information about themselves and what they do. Grassroots Al-Quds Network, GrassRootsAlQuds.ne, h ttp ://g ra ss roots al quds .net/gras s roots -al -quds -netw ork (last visited June 26, 2012).

255 E-Mail Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 48.

256 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90.

257 Chris Beyrer & Nancy E. Kass, Human Rights, Politics, and Reviews of Research Ethics, 360 The Lancet 246, 247 (2002) (noting that U.S. regulations require ethical review of human subjects research and that this review considers “whether studies have an adequate balance of benefits to risks, whether consent procedures are adequate, and whether any groups of participants are improperly targeted or denied benefits as a result of the study”).

258 Institutional Review Board, h ttp ://en.w i ki pedi a.org/w i ki /Ins ti tuti onal _rev i ew _board .

259 Voix des Kivus Leaflet, supra note 42, at 3.

260 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 8.

261 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90; E-Mail from Erica Hagen, supra note 34.

262 Heinzelman, supra note 26, at 62.

263 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90.

264 Research ethics codes all require informed consent, see Beyrer & Kass, supra note 257, at 248, as do human rights protocols, see [need cite].

265 Comments of Susannah Sirkin, Symposium Proceedings—Human Rights Impact: General Issues and Sectoral Perspectives 64 (Yasmine Ergas & Kristina Eberbach eds. 2010); see also Eileen Pittaway et al., “Stop Stealing Our Stories”: The Ethics of Research with Vulnerable Groups, 2(2) J. Hum. Rts. Practice 229, 233 (2010) (noting the difficulty of communicating the implications of releasing a DVD to the media in a refugee community).

266 Pittaway et al., supra note 265, at 233.

267 Gregory, supra note 153, at 204 (noting that models of informed consent that emphasize communicating the worst-case scenarios for impact—that the information will be seen by your oppressor or opponent—may be “impossible to sustain in the online participatory culture context of user-generated media”).

268 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

269 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 5.

270 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

271 Id. 272 Hagen, supra note 6, at 92. The “hacker’s ethos” is an approach that tries, among other things, to “build the best services over the long term by quickly releasing and learning from smaller iterations rather than trying to get everything right all at once.” Mark Zuckerberg’s Letter to Investors:‘The Hacker Way’, Wired (Feb. 1, 2012), available at h ttp ://w w w.w i red.com/bus i nes s /2012/02/z uck-l etter/ .

273 Hagen, supra note 6, at 73.

274 Telephone Interview with Susan Wolfinbarger, supra note 121.

275 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 119.

276 Padania et al., supra note 129, at 26.

277 Van der Windt & Humphreys, supra note 47, at 7.

278 Tom Sarrazin argues, for example, that “awareness-raising and promoting media literacy among ordinary citizens are the best tools in the fight for balance and fairness in citizen journalism.” Sarrazin, supra note 207, at 36.

WWW.OPENDTA. ORG

I NFORM ATI O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S F O R H U M A N R I GH T S

279 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

280 Approximately 70-80% of the phone holders would go out and gather information about what was happening in the village; the remainder would wait until villagers came to them with something to report. Id. 281 Although principles of ethics in the human rights context are not codified and vary by organization, most approaches emphasize informed consent—disclosing the purpose for collecting information and how the information will be used, ensuring the person understands (and is able to understand) the consequences of sharing information, and obtaining that person’s voluntary consent to share the information. See Gregory, supra note 153, at 202–03.

282 Witness, for example, supports the use of informed consent or, if that is not possible, “an assessment based either on objective, established principles (termed ‘a professional practice’)—or carried out by a wellinformed individual who seeks to determine what a person who has not given explicit consent might be expected to grant (‘a reasonable person’ guideline).” Id. at 202; see also Comments of Susannah Sirkin, supra note 265, at 64 (noting that in some instances, researchers may conclude that the risk is too great despite the witness’s consent; although motivated by security, “in making such decisions, it [the organization] runs the risk of becoming paternalistic”).

283 The choice of professional standards can have profound consequences for decision making. For example, there are tensions between “the medical ethics lens, which addresses each person individually, and the public health ethics lens, which primarily focuses on delivering the greatest good to the greatest number of people at the lowest cost.” Comments of Susannah Sirkin, supra note 265, at 64.

284 Human rights research ethics may actually be most flexible but least developed of these three. See Paul Gready, Introduction—“Responsibility to the Story,” 2(2) J. Hum. Rts. Practice 177, 179 (2010) (“Human rights practitioners lack a more general ethical code similar to those followed by other professions, such as lawyers, physicians and journalists.”).

285 Gregory, supra note 153, at 205.

286 Telephone Interview with Erica Hagen, supra note 90.

287 Telephone Interview with Thomas Maketa, supra note 60.

288 Hagen, supra note 6, at 72–77.

289 Telephone Interview with Jessica Heinzelman, supra note 25.

290 Telephone Interview with Peter van der Windt, supra note 45.

291 Id. 292 Hagen, supra note 6, at 92.

T H E W O R L D B A N K G R OU P

#ICT4HR

|ndex

45

|ndex