Q. What’s the Data Dictate (n)?
A. The data dictate (v).
I have argued in the original version of this entry that Data is God. That what
the Data Dictate states unequivocally is that we are data. Who we are, what we are, what we
do, with whom, where, when and how. With or without our knowledge, consent or
support, without our ability to opt in or opt out, without our ability to
prevent it, we are rendered into bits and bytes from preconception to
reincarnation. And beyond.
I assert that
we have moved from the Information Society to the Data Society. As a result, we
(especially those of us in the business of using data for social change and
development) should consider a paradigm shift, the implications of which are addressed
below.
Our understanding of Data is long overdue for an overhaul. Data is.
Period. It is more than a tool to help eradicate or achieve something. It is
more than a medium through which we create a platform, product or service, be
it for business, aid, activism, governance good and bad, destruction big and
small…
This means we need to reconsider conceptual (de)limitations of
terms such as “ICT/Open Data for [insert who/what you are/do here]” and
their impact on the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of (the
success or failure of) your program; on the feasibility or viability of your
proposed program, product or service. …
This also means that actors big and small in the global community
of social change and development must demolish the silos and borders we built
and build between and among us if we want to be more agile and efficient in
order to increase our chances for success. In other words if you are dealing
with data in your venture, it should matter little or not at all what your
discipline, field, profession, passion, program, product or service is. This
should free your mind and your assets will follow to enable you to partner with
anyone anywhere.
Data deserves way more respect than is currently accorded. There appears to be a glaring disparity
and dissonance in the valuation of data among and between actors in the global
community of social change and development. In developed countries, anything
relating to data management is regarded as highly valuable commodity and valued
and protected as such. Take for example any social media product or service of
your choice and find out how much it is worth, and the plethora of patents,
trademarks and copyrights it has and zealously protects, including all your
content in it. In fact, you and what you do on/with Facebook and YouTube are
exponentially more valuable to Zuckerman and Brin & Page respectively than
all their algorithms combined!
But when citizens in developing countries are the intended
beneficiaries of products, programs or services, two views dominate: That of the
for-profiters and that of the rest of us. The for-profiters intuitively
recognize the value , which is often significantly more than the same intended
for those in developed countries---the classic supply-demand principle at work
here. They therefore feverishly gobble up all data (open, shared, closed and
otherwise) they can find on developing countries, add them to theirs (which
were arguably paltry before), obtain and protect various IP rights
for them and then package and sell them, often to program sponsors or
implementing partners who most likely provided most of the data free of charge in the first place.
For the rest of us, valuation of the data generated by
implementing partners and/or their sponsors rarely go beyond contractual
obligations of delimited access and sharing, or of Creative Commons licensing.
This view is myopic and misguided. I ardently applaud and support the ingenuity
of the data for-profiters targeting developing countries. In fact they play a
critical role in the nascent data management economy in developing countries. It is understandable and no fault of theirs
that they are taking advantage of and profiteering handsomely from the data
rush to the new frontier.
But the rest of us, especially big program sponsors such as World
Bank, USAID, DFID, UNDP and UNESCO, need a whole new and effective game plan to
play or referee well in this new frontier. We are in dire need of an equitable
global data valuation system that includes data subjects in developing
countries. I cite two among the innumerable benefits such valuation system
would generate:
·
First,
it would be a potential cash-cow for program sponsors and implementing
partners. Just because we are non-profit does not mean all that we generate
should be free, especially when used by for-profiters. If done right, this
ever-replenishing revenue reservoir will help fund the creation of a global
data management development index and of data management ministries/secretariats
in developing countries.
·
Secondly,
it would support the growth and prosperity of local innovators and
entrepreneurs in the nascent data management economy in developing countries.
This group plays a crucial role in sustainable development and good governance.
Without this new valuation system, we unwittingly support what I
call the Second Coming phenomenon: The recolonization of old empires, this time
for the exploitation of their data resources.
******************************************************************************
Join the conversation at Facebook or @DataDictate.
Post your comments to this entry below or directly to us.
Send us your piece for publication
consideration.
Half of a great idea. You seem to be stuck temporarily in the existing paradigm and shifting ownership away from Zuckerberg et al, and into the hands of "NGO's" presumably in the same neighborhood as the recipients of assistance.
ReplyDeleteLet's take it a step further, and solve a lot of problems in the meantime. Give data ownership and brokerage into the hands of the individual. In the very near future, anyone with access to electrical current will have a data footprint and means to communicate. Owning one's data means being able to negotiate transactions in exchange for use of that data. I'm talking about commodifying oneself. Every time Fb wants to know my height, weight, favorite color or friend's names, they should pay my personality broker, and I will answer a question or allow an answer to be collected. That datum will be associated with a blockchain so ensure it isn't duplicated. Any use of the ensuing data or analytics must be accompanied by a record of this blockchain or it cannot be legally used. Every entity using the information can check easily to verify the origin. Fines will be severe, and falsification means exposure to the community. Data theft could be equated to cannibalism.
On a practical basis, not much will change. The same TOS, and Permissions upon app installation, but it will be a negotiated price for future access. The relationship and financial transaction will be transparent to use. New requests can go through a vetting process but the relationship in appspace is still use my app or service for free and I will get some info from you. With this exposed, maybe more users will 'pay as you go' and the app makers will incentivize by paying more, or asking less.
This is very helpful in Disaster. Each person can quickly express their needs and authenticate receipt. Direct donations are possible and community self organizing and priority setting becomes the norm. No NGO middle-layer required. They just organize aid from outside. Follow-on effects are resiliency and long term rejuvenation as the needs change form water, food to jobs and housing.