Periodic Reporting for period 1 - PEDAS (The Political Economy of Data: Comparing the Asian Giants)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2018-09-17 al 2020-09-16
• What is the problem/issue being addressed?
We have now reached the end of a relatively settled period of the international data economy where the big tech firms, such as Google and Facebook, grew rich harvesting the personal data of their users. Now their business model is being challenged. Taking effect in May 2018, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sparked a global data law revolution as countries around the world consider how to claw back a larger share of the profits generated by the personal data of their citizens.
This research looked at the intended and unintended consequences of the spread of data regulation from an emerging economy point of view as the big tech firms turned their focus to the populous, young, tech-savvy countries like India and Indonesia. Can these countries negotiate a bigger share in the value of personal data through national regulation? Or will there be what some are calling a form of “digital colonialism” where the data produced in their countries is turned into high value-added intelligence overseas to be sold back for enormous profit?
• Why is it important for society?
The move to digital economies has the potential to provide benefits for developing countries. However, under current conditions, the dominance of a small number of companies with their control of data, and capacity to create economic value from it, is likely to further accentuate increasing inequalities in the global economy.
• What are the overall objectives?
The overall objectives of this research were to chart the political debates and negotiations around the economics of personal data in India and Indonesia, to provide input for European and international policy-makers, and to contribute to theory on the international political economy of data.
• What are the research conclusions?
The research found that European data regulation (GDPR) has had an enormous influence on the development of data law around the world, including in countries of the Global South. However, despite some real and some superficial, similarities with the GDPR, data regulation in different countries is more decisively informed by the unique confluence of political interests, institutional legacies and rhetoric of each national jurisdiction.
Another conclusion is that alternative forms of value capture from data are emerging in the Global South, led by India. Framed in a new theory of “Digital ID Capitalism”, it is based on identity data gathered through the course of state welfare distribution, rather than the data trails left on the internet. The research undertaken during this project also found that countries of the Global South are in a good position to develop another alternative to the current US-led data business model – ‘data commons’.
The issue of “data localisation”, where countries around the world insist that US big tech firms build data centers on their home soil to store the data produced by their own citizens, has emerged as the hot button issue of the international negotiations over the global data economy. The research found that some countries use the issue as leverage in wider trade negotiations, while other countries have more realistic plans to build their own national digital economies around the construction of these data centers.
The research also led to policy advice for donors who design programmes to support digital economic growth in developing countries. It urged donors to acknowledge the sensitive confluence of interests around personal data which has human rights implications related to surveillance and privacy, in addition to national security interests and economic value for both domestic and international business. Donor programmes should therefore prioritise the use of political economy analysis (PEA) in programme design to support digital economic growth.
We have now reached the end of a relatively settled period of the international data economy where the big tech firms, such as Google and Facebook, grew rich harvesting the personal data of their users. Now their business model is being challenged. Taking effect in May 2018, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sparked a global data law revolution as countries around the world consider how to claw back a larger share of the profits generated by the personal data of their citizens.
This research looked at the intended and unintended consequences of the spread of data regulation from an emerging economy point of view as the big tech firms turned their focus to the populous, young, tech-savvy countries like India and Indonesia. Can these countries negotiate a bigger share in the value of personal data through national regulation? Or will there be what some are calling a form of “digital colonialism” where the data produced in their countries is turned into high value-added intelligence overseas to be sold back for enormous profit?
• Why is it important for society?
The move to digital economies has the potential to provide benefits for developing countries. However, under current conditions, the dominance of a small number of companies with their control of data, and capacity to create economic value from it, is likely to further accentuate increasing inequalities in the global economy.
• What are the overall objectives?
The overall objectives of this research were to chart the political debates and negotiations around the economics of personal data in India and Indonesia, to provide input for European and international policy-makers, and to contribute to theory on the international political economy of data.
• What are the research conclusions?
The research found that European data regulation (GDPR) has had an enormous influence on the development of data law around the world, including in countries of the Global South. However, despite some real and some superficial, similarities with the GDPR, data regulation in different countries is more decisively informed by the unique confluence of political interests, institutional legacies and rhetoric of each national jurisdiction.
Another conclusion is that alternative forms of value capture from data are emerging in the Global South, led by India. Framed in a new theory of “Digital ID Capitalism”, it is based on identity data gathered through the course of state welfare distribution, rather than the data trails left on the internet. The research undertaken during this project also found that countries of the Global South are in a good position to develop another alternative to the current US-led data business model – ‘data commons’.
The issue of “data localisation”, where countries around the world insist that US big tech firms build data centers on their home soil to store the data produced by their own citizens, has emerged as the hot button issue of the international negotiations over the global data economy. The research found that some countries use the issue as leverage in wider trade negotiations, while other countries have more realistic plans to build their own national digital economies around the construction of these data centers.
The research also led to policy advice for donors who design programmes to support digital economic growth in developing countries. It urged donors to acknowledge the sensitive confluence of interests around personal data which has human rights implications related to surveillance and privacy, in addition to national security interests and economic value for both domestic and international business. Donor programmes should therefore prioritise the use of political economy analysis (PEA) in programme design to support digital economic growth.
• Work Performed
The work performed included three months of field work in Indonesia and India, close to 40 interviews, and extensive desk research and writing. It also included training for the fellow in the technical elements of data storage and flows, and media and policy engagement.
• Exploitation and dissemination
The research was disseminated through various means, including - 3 academic articles; 3 media articles; 2 policy briefs; 9 presentations at academic conferences, invited talks and to business and policy-makers; 3 media appearances/comments to journalists.
Publications [@October 2020. Delays in peer review due to COVID means some articles still in peer review]
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) ‘Digital ID Capitalism: How Emerging Economies are Re-Inventing Digital Capitalism’, Contemporary Politics, DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2020.1751377 (10,000 words; journal impact factor: 1.226)
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) (in peer review) ‘A ‘Data Realm’ for the Global South? Evidence from Indonesia, Third World Quarterly (8,200 words; journal impact factor: 2.156).
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) (revise and resubmit) ‘Social Theorists needed for the Data Commons’, Sociological Review. (8,000 words; journal impact factor: 2.268)
‘Digital colonialism’: why some countries want to take control of their people’s data from Big Tech, The Conversation, 2019 (over 20,000 views)
Political sensitivities surround the BRI in Indonesia, Asia Dialogue, 2019
‘The struggle at the heart of Indonesia’s personal data protection bill,’ (forthcoming) The Conversation, 2020
Asia Research Institute Policy Brief: Prospects for a closer relationship with Indonesia after Brexit, 2019
Asia Research Institute Policy Brief: How can donors help developing countries engage with the global data economy?, 2020
The work performed included three months of field work in Indonesia and India, close to 40 interviews, and extensive desk research and writing. It also included training for the fellow in the technical elements of data storage and flows, and media and policy engagement.
• Exploitation and dissemination
The research was disseminated through various means, including - 3 academic articles; 3 media articles; 2 policy briefs; 9 presentations at academic conferences, invited talks and to business and policy-makers; 3 media appearances/comments to journalists.
Publications [@October 2020. Delays in peer review due to COVID means some articles still in peer review]
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) ‘Digital ID Capitalism: How Emerging Economies are Re-Inventing Digital Capitalism’, Contemporary Politics, DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2020.1751377 (10,000 words; journal impact factor: 1.226)
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) (in peer review) ‘A ‘Data Realm’ for the Global South? Evidence from Indonesia, Third World Quarterly (8,200 words; journal impact factor: 2.156).
Hicks, Jacqueline (2020) (revise and resubmit) ‘Social Theorists needed for the Data Commons’, Sociological Review. (8,000 words; journal impact factor: 2.268)
‘Digital colonialism’: why some countries want to take control of their people’s data from Big Tech, The Conversation, 2019 (over 20,000 views)
Political sensitivities surround the BRI in Indonesia, Asia Dialogue, 2019
‘The struggle at the heart of Indonesia’s personal data protection bill,’ (forthcoming) The Conversation, 2020
Asia Research Institute Policy Brief: Prospects for a closer relationship with Indonesia after Brexit, 2019
Asia Research Institute Policy Brief: How can donors help developing countries engage with the global data economy?, 2020
• Progress beyond the state of the art
This project has brought together a range of theories, ideas and research data in innovative ways. This has included bringing ideas from legal anthropology, natural resource governance and property rights doctrine in an exploration of the potential for a “data commons.” Another innovation was the application of the North American concept of an “information-security complex” to developing countries. A third theoretical innovation was the development of a new model of digital capitalism, called “Digital ID Capitalism.” Integrated throughout these theories were technical details of data flows, translated for a wider audience beyond computer specialists.
• Potential Socio-Economic Impacts
These theoretical innovations were mined for practical application by producing more easily digestible content in policy brief and media article form. Some potential socio-economic impacts include contributions to policy debates on data localisation, detail on the politics of data regulation for governments or business seeking to engage in national digital economic growth, and the development of ideas about alternative systems of value capture from data.
This project has brought together a range of theories, ideas and research data in innovative ways. This has included bringing ideas from legal anthropology, natural resource governance and property rights doctrine in an exploration of the potential for a “data commons.” Another innovation was the application of the North American concept of an “information-security complex” to developing countries. A third theoretical innovation was the development of a new model of digital capitalism, called “Digital ID Capitalism.” Integrated throughout these theories were technical details of data flows, translated for a wider audience beyond computer specialists.
• Potential Socio-Economic Impacts
These theoretical innovations were mined for practical application by producing more easily digestible content in policy brief and media article form. Some potential socio-economic impacts include contributions to policy debates on data localisation, detail on the politics of data regulation for governments or business seeking to engage in national digital economic growth, and the development of ideas about alternative systems of value capture from data.