Suchergebnisse

Background Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has been a key agent of change in the 21st century. Given the role of ICT in changing society, this research explores the responses and attitudes to change over time from ICT professionals and ICT academics in dealing with the potentially far reaching political challenge triggered by the UK's 2016 European Union Referendum and its decision to leave the European Union (Brexit). Whilst the vote was a UK based decision its ramifications have global implications and as such the research was not confined to the UK. This article presents the second phase of the research at the mid-point in the UK/European Union (EU) Brexit process, thus complementing the findings gathered immediately after the Referendum decision. The fundamental question being researched was: What are ICT professionals' personal and professional perspectives on the change triggered by Brexit in terms of opportunities and threats? Methods and findings Data was collected through a survey launched in March 2018, one year on from the UK's triggering of Article 50 and marking the mid-point in the two-year Brexit process. The survey replicated the one delivered at the point of the Referendum decision in 2016 with some developments. In addition, two appreciative inquiry focus groups were conducted. The research sought to understand any shifting perspectives on the opportunities and threats that would exist post-Brexit for ICT professionals and academics. 59% of survey participants were negative regarding the Brexit decision. Participants noted the position post-Brexit for the UK, and the remaining 27 EU Member States (EU27), was still very uncertain at this stage. They observed that planned change versus uncertainty provides for very different responses. In spite of the uncertainty, the participants were able to consider and advocate for potential opportunities although these were framed from national perspectives. The opportunities identified within the appreciative inquiry focus groups aligned to those recorded by survey participants with similar themes highlighted. However, the optimum conditions for change have yet to be reached as there is still not an informed position, message and clear leadership with detailed information for the ICT context. Further data will be gathered after the UK exit from the EU, assuming this occurs.

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is fundamental to the delivery and support of all aspects of society in addition to significantly contributing directly to each nation's GDP. This briefing captures key actions and requirements for the domain in the light of the UK's decision to exit the EU. It is based on the views of ICT and other professionals from the UK and internationally. It makes the case that the UK Government needs to work overtly with a wide range of ICT experts to ensure that laws are optimized for the ICT domain and that there are targeted policies and funding strategies to support and grow the ICT domain through this change. In addition, it raises the significance of international cooperation in particular to meet environmental and ICT ethical challenges.

Background: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has been a key agent of change in the 21st century. Given the role of ICT in changing society this research sought to explore the responses and attitudes to change from ICT professionals and ICT academics in dealing with the potentially far reaching political challenge triggered by the UK's 2016 European Union Referendum and its decision to leave the European Union (referred to as Brexit). Whilst the vote was a UK based decision its ramifications have global implications and as such the research was not confined to the UK. Methods and findings: Data was collected through a survey launched on the first working day after the Brexit referendum vote to leave the EU and kept open for four weeks. The survey contained qualitative and quantitative questions. It sought to understand the opportunities and threats that would exist post-Brexit for ICT professionals and academics triggered by the decision. The research captured a complex rich picture on ICT professionals' responses to the potential challenge of change triggered by the Brexit vote. Immediately after the Brexit decision the research reveals uncertainties amongst ICT professionals regarding what the decision would mean, with just under half of the participants not identifying any opportunities or threats. For those who did, threats outweighed opportunities by just more than double. Whilst understanding the global possibilities and dangers, participants saw their position from national and organizational perspectives. The highest frequency coded threats related to areas outside the participants' control and the highest frequency opportunities related to areas where there was the potential for ICT interventions. This survey is part of longitudinal piece of research. Using the same methodological approach two further surveys are planned. The second survey will be one year after Article 50 was triggered on 29 March 2017. The final survey will be one year after the UK exit from the EU, assuming this occurs.

Cover -- Guest editorial -- Climate change and web archives: an Ibero-American study based on the Portuguese and Brazilian contexts -- Sometimes, green is the outcome: climate action in records management and archives in Canada -- The impact of climate change on the Mpumalanga Provincial Archives and records management activities -- The impact of climate change on Canadian archives -- Infonomics and the environment -- Come hell or high water: climate action by archives, records and cultural heritage professionals in the United Kingdom.

AbstractThe rapid development of facial recognition technologies (FRT) has led to complex ethical choices in terms of balancing individual privacy rights versus delivering societal safety. Within this space, increasingly commonplace use of these technologies by law enforcement agencies has presented a particular lens for probing this complex landscape, its application, and the acceptable extent of citizen surveillance. This analysis focuses on the regulatory contexts and recent case law in the United States (USA), United Kingdom (UK), and European Union (EU) in terms of the use and misuse of FRT by law enforcement agencies. In the case of the USA, it is one of the main global regions in which the technology is being rapidly evolved, and yet, it has a patchwork of legislation with less emphasis on data protection and privacy. Within the context of the EU and the UK, there has been a critical focus on the development of accountability requirements particularly when considered in the context of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the legal focus on Privacy by Design (PbD). However, globally, there is no standardised human rights framework and regulatory requirements that can be easily applied to FRT rollout. This article contains a discursive discussion considering the complexity of the ethical and regulatory dimensions at play in these spaces including considering data protection and human rights frameworks. It concludes that data protection impact assessments (DPIA) and human rights impact assessments together with greater transparency, regulation, audit and explanation of FRT use, and application in individual contexts would improve FRT deployments. In addition, it sets out ten critical questions which it suggests need to be answered for the successful development and deployment of FRT and AI more broadly. It is suggested that these should be answered by lawmakers, policy makers, AI developers, and adopters.

The rapid development of facial recognition technologies (FRT) has led to complex ethical choices in terms of balancing individual privacy rights versus delivering societal safety. Within this space, increasingly commonplace use of these technologies by law enforcement agencies has presented a particular lens for probing this complex landscape, its application, and the acceptable extent of citizen surveillance. This analysis focuses on the regulatory contexts and recent case law in the United States (USA), United Kingdom (UK), and European Union (EU) in terms of the use and misuse of FRT by law enforcement agencies. In the case of the USA, it is one of the main global regions in which the technology is being rapidly evolved, and yet, it has a patchwork of legislation with less emphasis on data protection and privacy. Within the context of the EU and the UK, there has been a critical focus on the development of accountability requirements particularly when considered in the context of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the legal focus on Privacy by Design (PbD). However, globally, there is no standardised human rights framework and regulatory requirements that can be easily applied to FRT rollout. This article contains a discursive discussion considering the complexity of the ethical and regulatory dimensions at play in these spaces including considering data protection and human rights frameworks. It concludes that data protection impact assessments (DPIA) and human rights impact assessments together with greater transparency, regulation, audit and explanation of FRT use, and application in individual contexts would improve FRT deployments. In addition, it sets out ten critical questions which it suggests need to be answered for the successful development and deployment of FRT and AI more broadly. It is suggested that these should be answered by lawmakers, policy makers, AI developers, and adopters.

AbstractIn family settings stories, photographs and memory objects support narratives of identity and belonging. Such resources are often missing for people who were in care as children. As a result, they may be unable to fill gaps in their memories or answer simple questions about their early lives. In these circumstances, they turn to the records created about them by social workers and care providers to reconstruct personal histories. Research suggests that thousands of requests to view records for this purpose are made each year in England under the subject access provisions of data protection legislation. This article reports the findings of MIRRA, a participatory research project on the memory and identity dimensions of social care recordkeeping. Drawing on data collected during interviews and focus groups with adult care leavers, the study explores the motives and experiences of care‐experienced people who access their records in England. Findings show the practical and cultural challenges they face when doing so and the resulting impacts on well‐being. The study suggests that the development of person‐centred approaches to recordkeeping in social work, which focus on the perspectives and experiences of the individual, could better support the lifelong memory and identity needs of care‐experienced people.

In family settings stories, photographs and memory objects support narratives of identity and belonging. Such resources are often missing for people who were in care as children. As a result they may be unable to fill gaps in their memories or answer simple questions about their early lives. In these circumstances they turn to the records created about them by social workers and care providers to reconstruct personal histories. Research suggests that thousands of requests to view records for this purpose are made each year in England under the subject access provisions of Data Protection legislation. This article reports the findings of MIRRA, a participatory research project on the memory and identity dimensions of social care recordkeeping. Drawing on data collected during interviews and focus groups with adult care leavers, the study explores the motives and experiences of care-experienced people who access their records in England. Findings show the practical and cultural challenges they face when doing so, and the resulting impacts on wellbeing. The study suggests that the development of person-centred approaches to recordkeeping in social work, which focus on the perspectives and experiences of the individual, could better support the lifelong memory and identity needs of care-experienced people.

In 2019 there were over 75,000 children and young people in out-of-home care in England and Wales. Recent estimates suggest that up to half a million British people were in state or voluntary care as children, around 1% of the adult population. While individual experiences vary enormously by time and place, care-experienced people share in common the intensive documentation of their lives by social workers, educators, health professionals and associated practitioners. A complex, fragmented legislative and regulatory framework governs the creation and use of these records at the national level. Under UK law a 'care file' must be retained for at least seventy-five years, so that a substantial legacy of care data is held across the public, voluntary and private sectors. MIRRA: Memory – Identity – Rights in Records – Access, a participatory research project co-produced with care leavers, investigated recordkeeping practices in child social care from multiple perspectives. Interviews, focus groups and workshops with stakeholders identified critical failings in the creation, use, management and access of care records, which do not account for the needs and capabilities of multiple stakeholders. These failings have direct impact on the wellbeing and health of care-experienced people throughout their lives. MIRRA researchers developed a human-centred participatory recordkeeping approach to child social care, which this article describes. The approach combines the participatory continuum model (Rolan, 2017) and the capabilities approach to social work, rooting child social care recordkeeping in information rights principles.

AbstractWith its proposed EU AI Act, the EU is aspiring to lead the world in admiral AI regulation (April 2021). In this brief, we summarise and comment on the 'Presidency compromise text', which is a revised version of the proposed act reflecting the consultation and deliberation by member states and actors (November 2021). The compromise text echoes the sentiment of the original text, much of which remains largely unchanged. However, there are important shifts and some significant changes. Our main comments focus on exemptions to the act with respect to national security; changes that seek to further protect research, development and innovation; and the attempt to clarify the draft legislation's stance on algorithmic manipulation. Our target readership for this paper is those who are interested in tracking the evolution of the proposed EU AI act, such as policy-makers and those in the legal profession.