Principles for Ethical Application of Technology by Governmentofficials
In the heart of Detroit, a contentious decision was made by the city council, approving the use of facial recognition technology by the police force, despite widespread protests and in violation of the police department's own policy. This move has sparked a debate about the role of local communities in shaping technology policies, and the need for tech-enabled participatory governance and robust public engagement mechanisms.
In an effort to foster a more inclusive and transparent digital landscape, communities can effectively influence the responsible use of technology by their government. Strategies such as participatory budgeting and citizen assemblies, legislation and regulatory oversight at local levels, public hearings, advisory boards, and consultations, and co-governance frameworks are key to ensuring that residents have a meaningful voice in shaping technology policies.
Participatory budgeting and citizen assemblies allow community members to directly influence how government funds are allocated, including investments in technology. This fosters greater trust and alignment with residents’ needs. Local governments can also enact laws and ordinances on digital privacy, net neutrality, and broadband access, filling gaps left by federal policies, while public commissions oversee providers to ensure consumer protections and promote competition.
Public hearings, advisory boards, and consultations enable inclusive dialogue and stakeholder input, ensuring technology adoption aligns with community values and priorities. Co-governance frameworks, like the one between Flock Safety and law enforcement agencies, empower local communities and government entities to collaboratively design and implement projects, including those related to technology, enhancing impact and sustainability through shared decision-making.
In New York City, the struggle for transparency and accountability in technology adoption is ongoing. In 2017, a task force on Automated Decision Systems was appointed, but members were repeatedly denied requests for a list of automated systems already in use. The city's overly strict non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) have made it difficult for citizens to have a voice in local government technology decisions.
Examples of successful advocacy for privacy and transparency in technology adoption can be found in initiatives like Flock Safety’s transparency tools and co-governance pilots in cities. Flock Safety's approach grants law enforcement agencies and community members control over data use, emphasizing privacy, transparency, and democratic accountability. In Detroit, the Project Green Light program, a public-private partnership, uses high-definition surveillance cameras outside businesses to stream live data to police, prioritizing participants over non-participants. However, concerns have been raised about the program's potential impact on civil liberties, particularly in communities with a higher percentage of Black residents like Detroit.
The internet is shifting from a high-trust environment to a low-trust environment, with the use of surveillance potentially accelerating this shift in the physical world. In Oakland, residents and privacy advocates opposed plans for a Domain Awareness Center (DAC) due to concerns about intrusiveness and potential surveillance of protests. The front porch sitting program, an alternative to invasive surveillance programs like Project Green Light, has been replicated in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, and Detroit, offering a safer and more community-oriented approach to public safety.
In conclusion, effective community influence arises from combining technology-enabled participation, strong legislative frameworks, transparent oversight, and collaborative governance models that put residents at the center of decisions on technology adoption and data privacy. By working together, communities and governments can ensure that technology is used for good, promoting safety, transparency, and accountability.
- Strategies like participatory budgeting and citizen assemblies can help communities directly influence the allocation of funds for technology, fostering greater trust and alignment with their needs.
- Local governments can enact laws on digital privacy, net neutrality, and broadband access to ensure consumer protections and promote competition, filling gaps left by federal policies.
- Public hearings, advisory boards, and consultations provide opportunities for inclusive dialogue and stakeholder input, ensuring technology adoption aligns with community values and priorities.
- Co-governance frameworks, such as the one between Flock Safety and law enforcement agencies, empower local communities to collaboratively design and implement technology projects, enhancing impact and sustainability through shared decision-making.
