The improvement in human development is becoming vividly contingent on the surrounding natural environment, and may be confined by its future deterioration as a response to the negative stimulus. Man-made problems like increasing population, urbanization and industrialisation, of which our mother earth is a victim in this century, have forced society to consider whether human beings are changing the very conditions essential to life on Earth. Antediluvian technologies have played a very meager role in the planning, prediction, supervision and control of environmental processes at different scales and within various time spans. An effective environment protection policy is largely dependent on the quality of information available and the utility of contemporary technologies like Artificial intelligence (AI), deep learning and data analytics that can be used to take an appropriate decision at an appropriate time. This convergence can help AI move from in vitro (in research labs) to in vivo (in everyday lives).
The global environment is in a bad shape. Natural disasters around the world are happening at an alarming rate, we have witnessed earthquakes, wildfires and cyclones that cause mass flooding and property damage. Around twenty per cent of species currently face extinction, and that number could rise to 50 per cent by 2100. And even if all the world economies keep their Paris climate pledges, by 2100, it’s predicted that average global temperatures will be 3˚C higher than in pre-industrial times, making it an invincible environmental catastrophe. There are reports which suggest that the recent fire break in California, United States of America and the floods in Kerala, India could have been mitigated effectively with proper supervision and planning. Here comes the role of AI.AI is considered to be the most dynamic game-changer in the global economy. According to a World Economic Forum report, Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for the Earth, AI refers to computer systems that “can sense their environment, think, learn, and act in response to what they perceive and their programmed purposes.” AI has helped environment researchers clinch almost 90 per cent accuracy in spotting climate change factors like tropical cyclones, weather fronts, tidal changes and atmospheric rivers, which can cause heavy precipitation and are often impossible for humans to identify on their own. In India, AI has helped farmers get 30 per cent higher yields per hectare by providing information on preparing the land, applying fertilizer and choosing sowing dates, as reported by the Government of India in 2018. In Norway, AI has penetrated into the field of policy-making and helped create a flexible and autonomous electric grid, integrating more renewable energy.
The long list of technology and economy shapers, who believe that artificial intelligence, often encompassing machine learning and deep learning, is a “game changer” for climate change and environmental issues, includes Microsoft, Google, IBM and Tesla among others. Microsoft’s AI for Earth program has committed $50 million over five years to develop and test novel tech-applications for AI. In China, IBM’ Green Horizon project is utilizing an AI system that can forecast air pollution, track pollution sources and develop potential strategies and solutions to tackle it. For instance, data analysis can be used to determine whether it would be more effective to restrict carbon output close certain power plants in order to reduce pollution in a particular zone. The Ocean Data Alliance is developing a machine learning system to provide data from satellites and ocean exploration so that decision-makers can monitor shipping, ocean mining, fishing, coral bleaching or the outbreak of a marine disease. Modern technologies like artificial intelligence, geographic information system tools and movement detectors, are revamping the way wildlife reserves and conservation bodies are working across India.AI can also help prophesy the spread of invasive materials, keep a track of marine litter and measure water pollution levels. The 21st century is the age of data, with accuracy as the key, decision-makers and authorities will be able to respond to problems more quickly with real-time data. Considering the global evolution of AI and its application, it is evidentially predicted that by 2030, AI will add up to USD 15.7 trillion of the global economy which is more than the present output of China and India combined. The United Nations recognize that AI has the potential to accelerate progress towards a dignified life, in peace and prosperity, for all people. The UN Artificial Intelligence Summit held in Geneva (2017) suggested refocusing the use of this technology, on achieving sustainable development goals and assisting global economies to eliminate poverty and to conserve natural resources and protect the environment.
Countries and civil societies develop incredible AI application systems with diverse features, but sometimes these systems do not take into consideration the good of individuals and society. So, it is important to develop systems which can deliver the change required to build a clean, resource-secure and inclusive economy, enabled by technology and supported by public policy and investment. Many industry giants like Microsoft, Google and Tesla, while pushing the parameters for human innovations, have made productive efforts in developing ‘Earth Friendly’ or ‘Eco-Friendly’ AI mechanisms. For instance, Google’s brainchild DeepMind AI has helped the organization to curb their data centre energy usage by 40 per cent making them more energy efficient and reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions.AI innovation will also be fundamental to the attainment of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and will also promote the resolution of humanity’s grand challenges by maximizing on the unequalled quantities of data now being generated on sentiment behaviour, human health, migration and more.
For any country to maximally benefit from the AI revolution, it must adopt a deliberate policy to drive AI innovation and proliferation in sectors affecting climate change. With powerful economies making rapid progress in AI-based research, it is imperative that the World looks at AI as a critical element of environmental sustainability. These recent advances in AI are a wake-up call to policymakers as our climate is under increasing strain. Aiming for sustainability is an opportunity of this generation. AI and other Fourth Industrial revolution ideas are the new innovative solutions that can revolutionize environmental protection measures.
US Blacklist of Chinese Surveillance Companies Creates Supply Chain Confusion
The United States Department of Commerce’s decision to blacklist 28 Chinese public safety organizations and commercial entities hit at some of China’s most dominant vendors within the security industry. Of the eight commercial entities added to the blacklist, six of them are some of China’s most successful digital forensics, facial recognition, and AI companies. However, the two surveillance manufacturers who made this blacklist could have a significant impact on the global market at large—Dahua and Hikvision.
Putting geopolitics aside, Dahua’s and Hikvision’s positions within the overall global digital surveillance market makes their blacklisting somewhat of a shock, with the immediate effects touching off significant questions among U.S. partners, end users, and supply chain partners.
Frost & Sullivan’s research finds that, currently, Hikvision and Dahua rank second and third in total global sales among the $20.48 billion global surveillance market but are fast-tracking to become the top two vendors among IP surveillance camera manufacturers. Their insurgent rise among IP surveillance camera providers came about due to both companies’ aggressive growth pipelines, significant product libraries of high-quality surveillance cameras and new imaging technologies, and low-cost pricing models that provide customers with higher levels of affordability.
This is also not the first time that these two vendors have found themselves in the crosshairs of the U.S. government. In 2018, the U.S. initiated a ban on the sale and use of Hikvision and Dahua camera equipment within government-owned facilities, including the Department of Defense, military bases, and government-owned buildings. However, the vague language of the ban made it difficult for end users to determine whether they were just banned from new purchases of Dahua or Hikvision cameras or if they needed to completely rip-and-replace existing equipment with another brand. Systems integrators, distributors, and even technology partners themselves remained unsure of how they should handle the ban’s implications, only serving to sow confusion among U.S. customers.
In addition to confusion over how end users in the government space were to proceed regarding their Hikvision and Dahua equipment came the realization that both companies held significant customer share among commercial companies throughout the U.S. market—so where was the ban’s line being drawn for these entities? Were they to comply or not? If so, how? Again, these questions have remained unanswered since 2018.
Hikvision and Dahua each have built a strong presence within the U.S. market, despite the 2018 ban. Both companies are seen as regular participants in industry tradeshows and events, and remain active among industry partners throughout the surveillance ecosystem. Both companies have also attempted to work with the U.S. government to alleviate security concerns and draw clearer guidelines for their sales and distribution partners throughout the country. They even established regional operations centers and headquarters in the country.
While blacklisting does send a clearer message to end users, integrators, and distributors—for sales and usage of these companies’ technologies—remedies for future actions still remain unclear. When it comes to legacy Hikvision and Dahua cameras, the onus appears to be on end users and integrators to decide whether rip-and-replace strategies are the best way to comply with government rulings or to just leave the solutions in place and hope for the best.
As far as broader global impacts of this action, these will remain to be seen. While the 2018 ban did bring about talks of similar bans in other regions, none of these bans ever materialized. Dahua and Hikvision maintained their strong market positioning, even achieving higher-than-average growth rates in the past year. Blacklisting does send a stronger message to global regulators though, so market participants outside the U.S. will just have to adopt a wait-and-see posture to see how, if at all, they may need to prepare their own surveillance equipment supply chains for changes to come.
After Google’s new set of community standards: What next?
After weeks of Google’s community standard guidelines made headlines, the Digital Industry Group Inc. (Australia based NGO) rejected proposals from the regulating body based in the southern hemisphere. The group claimed that regulating “fake news” would make the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission a moral police institution. In late August, Google itself forbade its employees from indulging in the dissemination of inadequate information or one that involved internal debates. From the outset, the picture is a bit confusing. After the events in Australia, Google’s latest act of disciplinary intrusion seems all but galvanizing from certain interests or interest groups.
A year earlier, Google was shaken by claims of protecting top-level executives from sexual crimes; the issue took a serious turn and almost deteriorated company operations. If anything but Google’s development from the horror of 2018 clearly suggests a desperate need from the hierarchy to curb actions that could potentially damage the interests of several stakeholders. There is no comprehensive evidence to suggest that Google had a view on how the regulations were proposed in Australia. After all, until proven otherwise, all whistleblowing social media posts and comments are at one point of time, “fake”. Although the global giant has decided to discontinue all forms of unjustifiable freedom inside its premises; however, it does profit by providing the platform for activism and all forms of censure. The Digital Industry Group wants the freedom to encourage digital creative contents, but Google’s need to publish a community guideline looks more of a defensive shield against uncertainties.
On its statement, the disciplinary clause, significantly mentions about the actions that will be taken against staffs providing information that goes around Google’s internal message boards. In 2017, female employees inside the Google office were subjected to discrimination based on the “gender-ness” of working positions. Kevin Kernekee, an ex-employee, who was fired in 2018, confirmed that staff bullying was at the core of such messaging platforms. Growing incidents inside Google and its recent community stance are but only fuelling assumptions about the ghost that is surrounding the internet giant’s reputation. Consequently, from the consumer’s point of view, an instable organization of such global stature is an alarm.
The dissidents at Google are not to be blamed entirely. As many would argue, the very foundation of the company was based on the values of expression at work. The nature of access stipulated into Google’s interface is another example of what it stands for, at least in the eyes of consumers. Stakeholders would not wish for an internal turmoil; it would be against the enormous amount of trust invested into the workings of the company. If google can backtrack from its core values upon higher forces, consumers cannot expect anything different. Google is not merely a search engine; for almost half of the internet users, it is almost everything.
“Be responsible, Be helpful, Be thoughtful”. These phrases are the opening remarks from the newly engineered community guideline. As it claims in the document, three principles govern the core values at Google. Upon closer inspection, it also sounds as if the values are only based on what it expects from the people working for the company. A global company that can resort to disciplining its staff via written texts can also trim the rights of its far-reaching consumer groups. It might only be the beginning but the tail is on fire.
How to Design Responsible Technology
Biased algorithms and noninclusive data sets are contributing to a growing ‘techlash’ around the world. Today, the World Economic Forum, the international organisation for public-private cooperation has released a new approach to help governments and businesses counter these growing societal risks.
The Responsible Use of Technology report provides a step-by-step framework for companies and governments to pin point where and how they can integrate ethics and human rights-based approaches into innovation. Key questions and actions guide organizations through each phase of a technology’s development process and highlight what can be done and when to help organizations mitigate unethical practices. Notably, the framework can be applied on technology in the ‘final’ use and application phase, empowering users to play an active role in advocating for policies, laws and regulations that address societal risks.
The guide was co-designed by industry leaders from civil society, international organizations and businesses including BSR, the Markkula Centre for Applied Ethics, the United Nation’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Microsoft, Uber, Salesforce, IDEO, Deloitte, Omidyar Network and Workday. The team examined national technology strategies, international business programmes and ethical task forces from around the world, combining lessons learned with local expertise to develop a guide that would be inclusive across different cultures.
“Numerous government and large technology companies around the world have announced strategies for managing emerging technologies,” said Pablo Quintanilla, Fellow at the World Economic Forum, and Director in the Office of Innovation, Salesforce. “This project presents an opportunity for companies, national governments, civil society organizations, and consumers to teach and to learn from each other how to better build and deploy ethically-sound technology. Having an inclusive vision requires collaboration across all global stakeholders.”
“We need to apply ethics and human rights-based approaches to every phase in the lifecycle of technology – from design and development by technology companies through to the end use and application by companies across a range of industries,” said Hannah Darnton, Programme Manager, BSR. “Through this paper, we hope to advance the conversation of distributed responsibility and appropriate action across the whole value chain of actors.”
“Here, we can draw from lessons learned from companies’ efforts to implement ‘privacy and security by design,” said Sabrina Ross, Global Head of Marketplace Policy, Uber. “Operationalizing responsible design requires leveraging a shared framework and building it into the right parts of each company’s process, culture and commitments. At Uber, we’ve baked five principles into our product development process so that our marketplace design remains consistent with and accountable to these principles.”
This report is part of the World Economic Forum’s Responsible Development, Deployment and Use of Technology project. It is the first in a series tackling the topic of technology governance. It will help inform the key themes at the Forum’s Global Technology Governance Summit in San Francisco in April 2020. The project team will work across industries to produce a more detailed suite of implementation tools for organizations to help companies promote and train their own ‘ethical champions’. The steering committee now in place will codesign the next steps with the project team, building on the input already received from global stakeholders in Africa, Asia, Europe, North America and South America.
The Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution Network brings together more than 100 governments, businesses, start-ups, international organizations, members of civil society and world-renown experts to co-design and pilot innovative approaches to the policy and governance of technology. Teams in Colombia, China, India, Israel, Japan, UAE and US are creating human-centred and agile policies to be piloted by policy-makers and legislators, shaping the future of emerging technology in ways that maximize their benefits and minimize their risks. More than 40 projects are in progress across six areas: artificial intelligence, autonomous mobility, blockchain, data policy, drones and the internet of things.
The Network helped Rwanda write the world’s first agile aviation regulation for drones and is scaling this up throughout Africa and Asia. It also developed actionable governance toolkits for corporate executives on blockchain and artificial intelligence, co-designed the first-ever Industrial IoT (IIoT) Safety and Security Protocol and created a personal data policy framework with the UAE.
Best of the Net nominated essay: “Secrets”
So, mother, like Johannesburg, you cut me in deep, imaginative and raw ways. A cut from you was a project....
Satellites record second lowest Arctic sea ice extent since 1979
The polar oceans are among the most rapidly changing oceans in the world. The yearly cycle of the build-up and...
Revitalising the Quad
With a high-level informal meeting of the Foreign Ministers of US, India, Japan and Australia on the side lines of...
The return of a “political wunderkind”: Results of parliamentary elections in Austria
At the end of September, the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), led by the former Chancellor – the 33-year-old “political prodigy”...
Landmark labour reforms signal end of kafala system in Qatar
Qatar has announced sweeping reforms to its labour market, with a view to ending the kafala system and marking a...
US Blacklist of Chinese Surveillance Companies Creates Supply Chain Confusion
The United States Department of Commerce’s decision to blacklist 28 Chinese public safety organizations and commercial entities hit at some...
The Turkish Gambit
The only certainty in war is its intrinsic uncertainty, something Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan could soon chance upon. One...
Urban Development2 days ago
Cities Around the World Want to Be Resilient and Sustainable. But What Does This Mean?
Newsdesk3 days ago
Live Simulation Exercise to Prepare Public and Private Leaders for Pandemic Response
East Asia2 days ago
Semiconductor War between Japan and South Korea
Americas1 day ago
When Democracy Becomes the Problem: Why So Many Millions Still Support Donald Trump
Middle East3 days ago
Turkey and the Kurds: What goes around comes around
South Asia2 days ago
Kashmir Issue at the UNGA and the Nuclear Discourse
Middle East2 days ago
Could Turkish aggression boost peace in Syria?
Africa2 days ago
The Impact of Xenophobic Attack on Nigerians