A thorough review of the global humanitarian sector has found that it is not clear what rights the world's most vulnerable people have to their data.
advertisementThe nonprofit digital rights group said more transparency was needed about how humanitarian organizations handle the data of the world's most vulnerable people.
Recent reportAccess Now articles are based on 45 interviews with experts in humanitarian aid, technology companies, and the public sector.
Their research found that there were 220 of them. high tech companies At least 14 companies working in the humanitarian sector and brokering deals in between will participate.
According to the nonprofit, these partnerships are “typically opaque, increasingly consolidated into fewer hands, handle the data of the world's most vulnerable people, and provide fertile ground for greedy data brokers and intermediaries.” “We are providing the following.”
When people in need of assistance access assistance, they provide personal information about themselves and their families, which is used to provide them with what they need.
The report found that a small number of high-tech companies are competing for “sparse funds” to adapt information storage for a small number of aid organizations, which account for most of the world's funding.
The report noted that almost half of the world's aid goes to three UN agencies: the World Food Programme, UNHCR and UNICEF.
“We are seeing a trend towards disengagement from smaller, more innovative companies and hoarding of contracts by people who know the inner workings of these processes,” the report added.
“Digital copyright infringement”
There is also little disclosure from both humanitarian and technology companies about how they work together to protect personal data, the report continues.
This means it will be more difficult for people seeking assistance to consent to how their data is used, resulting in “a direct violation of the digital rights of at-risk communities.”
Some aid organizations send personal information to cloud storage in foreign countries so that governments in conflict areas cannot access that data.
But an NGO's data flows, including how that information is stored, are predetermined by the technology companies it works with. Therefore, data owners in conflict zones cannot choose where and how their information is stored, even if they want to seek help.
The report says personal information is safe because it is anonymized before being sent to the cloud, but it can be combined with other datasets that make the information public.
Therefore, the authors continue, the information could still be used to cause harm or to profile specific individuals or communities at risk.
“Fundamental data rights, such as the ability to withdraw consent, edit and delete records, and even redress in the event of an accident or harm, are extremely difficult to define and nearly impossible to achieve.” The report concludes.
“The way these tools are used has no negative consequences.”
The line between the technology and humanitarian sectors has become increasingly blurred over time, the report added.
Humanitarian organizations working in Europe must complete a data protection impact assessment (DPIA), a process that identifies the risks of processing personal data and how to minimize those risks. These are used to demonstrate that an organization or business complies with European regulations.
The study found that while major UN agencies and international NGOs carry out such assessments, the technology companies that collect the data often do not, making it difficult to know what ethical standards are being met. turned out to be difficult.
advertisementSome aid organizations, such as UNHCR and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), are exploring stronger data protection and biometric identification practices.
“Digital technologies are at the center of societal debates about their impact on people and communities, including issues around data collection,” the ICRC said in a statement to Euronews Next.
“We want to ensure that the way we use these tools does not negatively impact the people we support or our perceptions.”
However, NGOs choose technology solutions based on “financial accessibility” rather than ethics, Access Now said.
Nor were humanitarian actors found to check for conflicts of interest among suppliers and partners.
advertisementThe report offers several recommendations, including disclosure of conflicts of interest by tech companies. The authors suggest that humanitarian organizations better track, monitor, and disclose how their data is recorded and stored.
