Data revolution or data divide? Can social movements bring the

human back into civic tech?

TICTeC 2016Kersti Ruth Wissenbach

@kerstiru

1. How do citizens resist massive data collection by means of technical fixes (re-active data activism)?

2. How do social movements use big data to foster social change (pro-active data activism)?

3. How does data activism affect the dynamics of transnational civil society, and transnational advocacy networks in particular?

PI Dr. Stefania MilanDepartment of Media Studies, University of Amsterdam

Data Activism: The Politics of Big Data According to Civil Society

Expanding civic tech community or ‚selling out‘ tools?

What happens to civic technologies and activism networks as they disperse into a ‚development context‘?

And why do we need a new perspective?

Civic Tech for this research

Civic Tech

Activism

• Coding, design, advocacy skills to a cause they are effected by or feel strongly about• Empower active citizenry from within the civic

sphere

Transparency and accountability

Open data

open government

Own creation & utilization of - new /

localizable communication

means (data, ICTs)

Trans-local / trans-national

networksField of action

Direct action

Expansion into developing

environments

‚Starting points‘• In development context civic tech and community ‘separated’

– focus on tech implementation [by development agencies] rather than community

• NGOs acting ‘on behalf of’ local civil society may prevent growth of civic tech community towards more contextual action repertoires, diversity, inclusive growth – Disconnect between wider thematic expertise and related approaches

(inclusion/ participation) and contemporary TA, open government work?• Civic tech field risking to replicate patterns of older tech-

deterministic approaches?– Discourse (not action) around defining civic tech seems to replicate

concerns around tech-domination and limited attention towards communication and community the ICT4D community has already processed. (McCann 2015)

It‘s about power, not toolsPotential power shifts – civic driven (local, national, transnational)

• ‘Genuine bottom-up expression of public will’ • Removing hierarchies and intermediaries > direct governance• Building and utilization technologies to open up civil society space • Strength through community building and mutual support across localities

How does an active community expand, rather than their tools?

• Who is represented in data? [‚data scientists are not social scientists‘ (Taylor 2015)]• Who is involved in utilization of data, tools, etc.?• Hierarchies within networks?• What form of participation is power?

Counter-act prevailing power structures > focus on the definition and enactment of the civic

Change perspective, not the labelMOVEMENTS AS NEW ‚FUNDING TARGET‘? > pressing social movements into conventional structures but what if the structure is rotten?

‘RE-LABELING’ = New terms old practises

ISOLATING DIGITAL DIVIDE FROM BROADER PROBLEM OF THE DEVELOPMENT DIVIDEMeta discourse: UNESCO, ITU to WSIS [‘there has never been a power shift (Hamelink: 2016)]

Academia: Development Communication, ICT4D, stagnation?

Practise: Participatory tech hype? / cleavages btw activists, NGOs, donors; Limitation in organizational structures

Social Movement Lens =

methodological provision, not [funding] target

Mapping the fieldExpose links to wider

movements/ transnational engagements

Grassroots activism

individualsorganisations

events

democracy/power

ICT4Ddata

tools

participation/agency

contexts

information

Development Communication Participatory

approaches Citizen media

platforms

(users)

Civic Tech Activism

tools

Dependency

Modernization Theories Behaviour

change

Information

Communication dialogue

People vs. Media centred

Mass media

Paradigmatic challenge to development

TA (open government / data)

Technocratic/magic bullet vs integrative/particip. approach

Civic collective action

capacities

open ICT4D

democracy participation inclusion

open development

Social Movement

Theory

Process

Action repertoires

Collective identity

Opportunity structures

(Emancipatory Communication)

Activism

Baack, S.( 2015) Network tool: Gephi

Contributors (Github)

Followers (Github)

users

communic-

ators

strategists

makers

Civic Tech Activism > How does collectivity unfold, not technology?

cultures

language

meaning

making

values

emotions

agendasof interest

tools

tacticsengagement

dialogue

What is the nature of collective action in transnational Civic Tech Activism?

1. What are the action repertoires of civic tech

activists?2. How is collective identity in the field of civic

tech activism created?3. Is there a relation between the action

repertoire of civic tech activists and the formation of a collective identity?

Collective ActionSocially constructed field of shared action

Civic organizing + Developing & utilizing tools and tactics for

socio-political goal

Civic Tech Activism

Individuals, organisations, events

Action Repertoires(tools, tactics, communication, etc.)

Opportunity Structures(political, cultural, etc.)

Identity formation

(individual / collective)Emotions,

values, etc.

Civic Tech Activism

Individuals, organisations, events

Internal: Action repertoires

External: Opportunity structures

Identity formation

(individual / collective)

Development agencies

Action Repertoires

> [Appropriation

?]

organizational structures

Inclusion in shared action Social construct of shared action

With the concepts and tools of SMR it will be analysed

• How civic tech activists make sense of their involvement

• How the individual interacts with the collective > to what extend technology is able to shape such interaction

• How shared values and principles are translated into practice (action repertoires)

• If they transcend [as tools travel]

Contribution to the field

• Respond to lacking empirical evidence as to why increased ICT-accessibility on its own should drive democracy and civic participation

• Contribute to fill research gap on civic tech activism (vs tools /users)

• Provide new, civic-centred theoretical approach to the field > social movement lens (people and process focus (communication)– Not addressed in ICT4D research – Stagnation in Development Communication research– socio-political activities in developing countries don‘t need to be

linked to development theory and repertoire of approaches

MethodologyRequired data MethodCivic Tech ActivistsOpportunity structures, identity formation, action repertoire

Concept use and interpretation of civic tech terminology

Literature / document analysisDigital methods: Issue crawlerSurvey among civic tech networks

Structuregeographic, demographic

Network mapping: data repositories, online groupsSurvey: mailing lists / google groups, CT organisations

Group dynamics / engagement patternscreation, maintenance, expansion of networks; Challenges; Ways of organizing, patterns/levels of internal/external engagement Language, cultures of communicating, etc.

Observation: online and offline gatheringsInterviews: individual activists, community managers from civic tech organizations

Contexts (motivational, personal)Reasons for engagement, triggers for involvement personal contextsFeeling of belonging (local, national, transnational)

Surveys: mailing listsSemi-structured interviews: during events, onlineObservation: civic tech events

MethodologyRequired data Method Civic Tech Activists

Action repertoiresToos and tacticsStrategies Communication practices (outreach and engagement)

Interviews: activists, community managers, potential project staff of tool utilization

Civic Technologies (within action repertoire)

Technologies builtwhere, by whom, why

Digital mapping: Githhub scrapingInterviews: civic tech activists and organisations

Utilization of civic techwhere by whom, how, whyImplementing parties, strategies, collaboration patterns

Document analysis: Collection and analysis of project documentation / project strategiesInterviews: implementing entities

@kerstirukerstiwissenbach.comdata-activism.net