Search

Search results

    The Ethical Use of Personal Data to Build Artificial Intelligence Technologies: A Case Study on Remote Biometric Identity Verification
    Neal Cohen. 4/4/2020. “The Ethical Use of Personal Data to Build Artificial Intelligence Technologies: A Case Study on Remote Biometric Identity Verification.” Carr Center Discussion Paper Series, 2020-004. See full text.Abstract
    Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies have the capacity to do a great deal of good in the world, but whether they do so is not only dependent upon how we use those AI technologies but also how we build those AI technologies in the first place.

    The unfortunate truth is that personal data has become the bricks and mortar used to build many AI technologies and more must be done to protect and safeguard the humans whose personal data is being used. Through a case study on AI-powered remote biometric identity verification, this paper seeks to explore the technical requirements of building AI technologies with high volumes of personal data and the implications of such on our understanding of existing data protection frameworks. Ultimately, a path forward is proposed for ethically using personal data to build AI technologies.

    Read the paper here. 

    Upholding Non-Discrimination Principles in the Covid-19 Outbreak
    Jacqueline Bhabha, Laura Cordisco-Tsai, Teresa Hodge, and Laurin Leonard. 4/10/2020. “Upholding Non-Discrimination Principles in the Covid-19 Outbreak.” Carr Center Covid-19 Discussion Paper Series, 03. See full text.Abstract
    Carr Center faculty and fellows discuss how we can employ principles of non-discrimination to address the pandemic’s disproportionate impact on our most vulnerable communities.

    In our third Covid-19 Discussion Paper, Professor of the Practice of Health and Human Rights, Jacqueline Bhabha; Technology and Human Rights Fellows Laurin Leonard and Teresa Hodge; and Carr Center Fellow, Laura Cordisco-Tsai, outline how Covid-19 disproportionately impacts the world's most vulnerable communities. From prison populations to survivors of human trafficking, "Vulnerable communities often are not positioned to ensure their human rights are preserved in times of a crisis—they are often a historical afterthought."

    Read the full text here. 

    Coronavirus Presents Bonanza for Kleptocrats
    Mark Wolf and Richard J. Goldstone. 4/4/2020. “Coronavirus Presents Bonanza for Kleptocrats.” The Boston Globe. See full text.Abstract
    In order to keep kleptocrats accountable, an International Anti-Corruption Court must be established. 

    Very little is certain about the coronavirus, and we are only judges, not prophets. However, we can confidently predict that the response to the pandemic will be a bonanza for kleptocrats — an opportunity for the corrupt leaders of many countries to further enrich themselves.

    Governments are poised to provide trillions of dollars to counter the pandemic, without even the usual, often ineffective, safeguards to assure that the funds are properly spent. The coronavirus will, therefore, provide additional compelling proof that the world needs an International Anti-Corruption Court to punish and deter kleptocrats who enjoy impunity in the countries they rule.

     

    How the COVID-19 Era Will Change National Security Forever
    Samantha Power. 4/14/2020. “How the COVID-19 Era Will Change National Security Forever.” Time Magazine. See full article. Abstract
    Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN shares her thoughts on structural changes needed in a "post-COVID" world. 

    History shows us that seismic events have the potential to unite even politically divided Americans behind common cause. In the U.S., the COVID-19 pandemic has already taken more than seven times the number of lives as terrorists did in the 9/11 attacks, but the outpouring of solidarity Americans have shown for one another has so far not translated into more unity over government’s proper role at home or America’s proper role abroad. Indeed, the virus struck in an era of the most virulent polarization ever recorded—an unprecedented 82-percentage point divide between Republicans’ and Democrats’ average job-approval ratings of President Trump. And so far that gap appears only to be widening, while internationally, political leaders are trading recriminations rather than coordinating the procurement of medical supplies.

    But the shared enemy of a future pandemic must bring about a redefinition of national security and generate long overdue increases of federal investments in domestic and global health security preparedness.

     

    This Won’t End for Anyone Until It Ends for Everyone
    Samantha Power. 4/7/2020. “This Won’t End for Anyone Until It Ends for Everyone.” The New York Times. See full text. Abstract
    The U.S. is walking away from international organizations, and the world's most vulnerable are facing the consequences.

    Close to 370,000 infections and nearly 11,000 deaths in the United States. Nearly 10 million Americans filing unemployment claims. Unimaginable heartbreak and hardship, with worse to come. Given this still-developing emergency, and the fatal inadequacy of the U.S. government’s domestic preparedness and response so far, it is very hard to focus on the devastation that is about to strike the world’s poorest and most vulnerable.

    But if President Trump doesn’t overcome his go-it-alone mind-set and take immediate steps to mobilize a global coalition to combat the Covid-19 pandemic, its spread will cause a catastrophic loss of life and make it impossible to restore normalcy in the United States in the foreseeable future.

     

     

    Questions, Answers, and Some Cautionary Updates Regarding the 3.5% Rule
    Erica Chenoweth. 4/20/2020. “Questions, Answers, and Some Cautionary Updates Regarding the 3.5% Rule.” Carr Center Discussion Paper Series, 2020-005. See full text.Abstract
    The “3.5% rule” refers to the claim that no government has withstood a challenge of 3.5% of their population mobilized against it during a peak event. In this brief paper, author Erica Chenoweth addresses some of the common questions about the 3.5% rule, as well as several updates from more recent work on this topic.

    Four key takeaways are as follows:

    • The 3.5% figure is a descriptive statistic based on a sample of historical movements. It is not necessarily a prescriptive one, and no one can see the future. Trying to achieve the threshold without building a broader public constituency does not guarantee success in the future.
    • The 3.5% participation metric may be useful as a rule of thumb in most cases; however, other factors—momentum, organization, strategic leadership, and sustainability—are likely as important as large-scale participation in achieving movement success and are often precursors to achieving 3.5% participation.
    • New research suggests that one nonviolent movement, Bahrain in 2011-2014, appears to have decisively failed despite achieving over 6% popular participation at its peak. This suggests that there has been at least one exception to the 3.5% rule, and that the rule is a tendency, rather than a law.
    • Large peak participation size is associated with movement success. However, most mass nonviolent movements that have succeeded have done so even without achieving 3.5% popular participation. 

    Read the full paper. 

    The Global Pandemic Has Spawned New Forms of Activism – and They’re Flourishing
    Erica Chenoweth, Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, Jeremy Pressman, Felipe G Santos, and Jay Ulfelder. 4/20/2020. “The Global Pandemic Has Spawned New Forms of Activism – and They’re Flourishing.” The Guardian. See full text.Abstract
    We’ve identified nearly 100 distinct methods of nonviolent action that include physical, virtual and hybrid actions
    Erica Chenoweth and team have been collecting data on the various methods that people have used to express solidarity or adapted to press for change in the midst of this crisis. In just several weeks’ time, they've identified nearly 100 distinct methods of nonviolent action that include physical, virtual and hybrid actions – and they’re still counting. Far from condemning social movements to obsolescence, the pandemic – and governments’ responses to it – are spawning new tools, new strategies, and new motivation to push for change.

    Read the full article from The Gaurdian.

     
    Smart City Visions and Human Rights: Do They Go Together?
    Tina Kempin Reuter. 4/24/2020. “Smart City Visions and Human Rights: Do They Go Together?” Carr Center Discussion Paper Series, 2020-006. See full text.Abstract
    Over half of the world’s population lives in cities today. According to the latest predictions, more than two thirds of all people will inhabit an urban environment by 2050. The number and size of cities has increased over the last decades, with the highest projections for future growth in the Global South. As cities continue to expand, so does their impact on policy generation, as political players, as drivers of states’ economies, and as hubs for social innovation and cultural exchange. Cities are important actors on the national and international stage, with mayors’ conferences, city grassroots organizations, and urban citizens driving the search for today’s most pressing problems, including climate change, inequity, migration, and human rights concerns. Many have expressed hope that “cities [will] deliver where nation states have failed.” Organizing this ever-growing, dynamic human space, enabling people from diverse backgrounds to live together, addressing the spatial and social challenges of urban life, and delivering services to inhabitants are challenges that cities have struggled with and that continue to dominate the urban policy agenda.
     

    Read full text here. 

    The Pandemic Needs a Global Response
    Kathryn Sikkink. 4/15/2020. “The Pandemic Needs a Global Response.” The New York Times . See full text. Abstract
    As the coronavirus crisis erupts worldwide, the world's most powerful international institution, the UN Security Council (UNSC), is reeling.

    The UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, has described the pandemic as one of the most important challenges the United Nations has faced since its creation. Several coordinated multilateral efforts have been put in place between the WHO and the UN, and the UNSC, the body that centralizes all the efforts of the United Nations on international peace and security and addresses global crises like the one we are experiencing. However, today, when the world faces the greatest threat of our time, the Security Council is missing. It is time for the Security Council to rise to this crisis. The Dominican Republic, which currently holds the presidency of the UNSC, has a historic opportunity to lead global efforts against the Coronavirus and mitigate its repercussions on world peace and security. The Dominican Republic should its position to unify the Council around a presidential statement calling for a coordinated global response as the first step in Council action. If the presidential statement is framed in a forward-looking manner, they can perhaps get permanent members on board, making it possible to take stronger action in the future.

    There is a need for a decisive declaration that calls for working together could make all the difference: legitimatize recent General Assembly decisions, reinforce the authority of the secretary-general, and strengthen the efforts of specialized UN agencies to save lives. This presidential statement should first endorse Secretary-General Guterres' call for a worldwide ceasefire in all conflicts around the globe. The Coronavirus hit the developed world first, but it can ravage war-torn regions even more. A functioning global ceasefire can help ensure that medical personnel has safe and unhindered access to the sick in these areas. Without it, the disease will exponentially spread. Civil society groups and even some warring parties are responding positively to the Secretary General's proposal, but so far, the Security Council has had nothing to say. Without Security Council backing, other warring parties may not lay down their arms. Now more than ever, we need unity and leadership from the Security Council. The security of the world and the legitimacy of the Security Council depends on the capacity of its members, including the small, to assume the responsibility for our shared future. 

    This article has been translated from its original text in Spanish.

Pages