Difference between revisions of "Digital Public Infrastructure"

Revision as of 18:09, 30 April 2024

Full Title or Meme

Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) is made up of secure and interoperable digital systems that enable the delivery of public services. DPI represents a potentially transformative force that can shape societies worldwide, making them safe, stronger and more inclusive.

• https://safedpi.gitbook.io/safeguards/working-group-documents/reports DPI Safeguards First Interim Report] 2024-04-29 This first Interim Report serves as a foundation for gathering multi-stakeholder feedback. The report is derived from an extensive consultative process and presents early findings on the opportunities presented by DPI and notes the urgent need for guardrails. It presents an actionable framework to guide implementation that purposely avoids potential pitfalls. The report also identifies next steps and timelines for developing the Universal Safeguards for DPI.
• https://www.dpi-safeguards.org/wg-members Working Group Members]

About this Interim Report

This Interim Report is compiled based on extensive research conducted by 44 experts and practitioners in the field of Digital Public Infrastructure and associated transformations.

For questions, feedback or clarification, contact: dpi-safeguards@un.org.

Introduction

Key Priorities of Digital Cooperation Achieving universal connectivity by 2030

1. Promoting digital public goods to create a more equitable world
2. Ensuring digital inclusion for all, including the most vulnerable
3. Strengthening digital capacity building
4. Ensuring the protection of human rights in the digital era
5. Supporting global cooperation on artificial intelligence
6. Promoting trust and security in the digital environment
7. Building a more effective architecture for digital cooperation

Trust and equity are key to how DPI can be leveraged to build a safe and inclusive society. Given the fundamental role DPI can play in delivering public services, it is essential that these services benefit all people in a safe and equitable manner, while ensuring that no rights or privileges are degraded or retrogressive measures adopted. To uphold this, the proper actions needed to build a safe and inclusive society should be embedded across all stages of the DPI life cycle, and integrated into all associated legal and regulatory frameworks and governance mechanisms.

Inclusion as a catalyst for equity

Equity has multiple facets. It implies fair and inclusive access to DPI. The aim is not just to make technology available to everyone; it is about tailoring it to be scalable (up or down) and people-friendly, so that engaging with DPI becomes a seamless experience for all, irrespective of background or resources. Equity underpins all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), hence a focus on equity through the DPI life cycle can accelerate achievement of the SDGs. Ultimately, this means ensuring that the disadvantaged and the most vulnerable people can reap the benefits of inclusive and sustainable development. Inclusivity is essential for fostering equity. It can manifest through design choices that solve problems related to identification or biometric failure, for instance. Similarly, inclusivity should be woven into policies that mandate bias-assessment in service or product delivery. Inclusivity can also be used to incentivize awareness and digital literacy outreach. For marginalized individuals and communities who rely on a government safety net for basic necessities, the consequences of exclusion can be particularly severe and exacerbate existing inequalities.

The DPI Opportunity

• Creation of sustainable goals by 2030.

The benefit of DPI opportunities hinges on designs and implementations that mitigates any unintended consequences, particularly impacting vulnerable and marginalized populations. By proactively addressing potential risks, it is possible to navigate the complexities of DPI acceleration while fostering safe, inclusive and sustainable outcomes for all.

An Urgent Need for Guardrails

Although DPI has the potential to enable inclusive economic growth and accelerate progress towards SDGs, DPI still poses several risks that may impede progress or cause harm. Improperly or inappropriately designed and implemented DPI may result in risks at all scales of social organization: individual, community (geographical, social etc.), institutional, regional, national and global. Risks to individuals and communities differ according to factors that include, but are not limited to race, ethnicity, gender and disabilities.

Human Rights Violations

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) establishes a common standard of rights for all. These include civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Improperly designed and implemented DPI systems, including the associated governance mechanisms, have been found to present risks of human rights violations including discrimination, exclusion, interference with privacy, and limited or no access to justice and the rule of law.

Market Distortions

Concentration of market power among a few actors may cause harm from and limit the benefits of DPI, for example by limiting sovereignty, services, and consumer protection. The harms of market distortion are most felt in the absence of protection mechanisms.

Actionable Framework

Mitigating and Managing Risks

A bias for in-country implementation is at the heart of this initiative. The risk categories identified above need to be mitigated, and residual risks need to be managed proactively in the context of each country and its sociopolitical environment. For this to be effective, a set of principles (foundational and operational) are essential to align systemic action by all stakeholders in a holding environment that creates trust and multi-stakeholder responsiveness during implementation.

Foundational Principles

DPI that fosters a safe and inclusive society…

1. Do no harm: Harms to individuals may not be immediately obvious. A human rights-based framework should be integrated throughout the DPI life cycle to proactively and effectively assess and address any potential human rights harms and power differentials.
2. Do not discriminate: All individuals, regardless of their intersecting identities, should be empowered with unbiased access. Circumstances of historically vulnerable communities, marginalized groups and those who opt out should be included in every risk assessment.
3. Are not exclusive: All individuals should have alternative modes (digital / non-digital) to access services enabled by DPI based on their individual capacity and resources. Modes of access should not be limiting, conditional or mandatory — explicitly or de facto.
4. Reinforce transparency and accountability: DPI should be developed with democratic participation, public oversight, promote fair market competition, and avoid vendor lock-in. All partnerships should be transparent, accountable, and publicly governed.
5. Guard by the rule of law: DPI should be introduced with a clear legal basis and regulated by laws. Regulatory frameworks should be supported with capacity for sector-specific tailoring (e.g. health), implementation and oversight.
6. Promote autonomy and agency: Ensure that everyone (especially indigenous communities with sui generis rights), on their own or with assistance, can take control of their data, promote their agency, exercise choice, and ensure their society’s well-being.
7. Foster community engagement: All stages of the DPI life cycle should center on the needs and interests of individuals and communities at risk. They should engage, participate at critical junctures and actively provide feedback in an environment of transparency and trust.
8. Ensure effective remedy and redress: Complaint response and redress mechanisms, avenues for appeal, supported by robust administrative and judicial monitoring and review processes, should be accessible to all in a transparent and equitable manner.
9. Focus on future sustainability: Emphasizing foresight is a key responsibility to anticipate and limit long-term harms. For example, environmental impacts of DPI due to factors such as e-waste management policies of countries should be assessed and addressed

References