Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Working Paper

581. Data Standards Task Force for Digital Cooperation

Author:
Michel Girard
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
There is no consensus to create a global framework for managing data governance under the United Nations. A Data Standards Task Force (DSTF) is needed to create a single data zone where trustworthy data could circulate freely between like-minded countries. This proposal is aligned with the objectives of fora such as the International Grand Committee on Big Data, Privacy and Democracy. Canada could also spearhead the launch of the DSTF with like-minded countries through the implementation of regional free trade agreements such as the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement or the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Topic:
International Cooperation, United Nations, Trade Policy, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

582. Helping Organizations Master Data Governance

Author:
Michel Girard
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Data is seen by many as the most lucrative commodity of the new global economy. Data analytics and self-teaching algorithms are projected to continue to disrupt every imaginable market and to create new ones. Many organizations are struggling to integrate big data analytics into their operations. New data governance challenges could be tackled through adherence to a data governance standard. There is currently no standard in place to provide guidance on the deployment of corporate data policies to manage ethics, transparency and trust in data value chains. This policy brief outlines the issues that should be covered in the proposed standard.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, and Data
Political Geography:
Global Focus

583. Modern Conflict and Artificial Intelligence

Author:
Aaron Shull, Daniel Araya, Samantha Bradshaw, Amandeep Singh Gill, Michael Horowitz, Meg King, Robert Mazzolin, Maya Medeiros, Rodrigo Nieto-Gomez, and Liis Vihul
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Autonomous systems are revolutionizing our lives, but they present clear international security concerns. Despite the risks, emerging technologies are increasingly applied as tools for cybersecurity and, in some cases, cyberwarfare. In this essay series, first published online, experts explore digital threats to democracy and security, and the geopolitical tensions they create.
Topic:
Cybersecurity, Conflict, Artificial Intelligence, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus

584. Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence: An Overview

Author:
Suzie Dunn
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
As digital technologies become more sophisticated, so does technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV). This type of violence can take many forms, from the release of personal information and private images without consent, to online stalking and death threats. For perpetrators of TFGBV, the internet is their weapon of choice — it allows them to monitor and control their targets from anywhere in the world. Victim-survivors have little recourse against the many forms of online gender-based violence, including threats of harm, some of which have been carried out. The resulting mental and physical health effects of TFGBV, among other impacts, have forced many victim-survivors out of online spaces and silenced their voices.
Topic:
Gender Issues, Science and Technology, Gender Based Violence, and Mental Health
Political Geography:
Global Focus

585. Data Is Divisive: A History of Public Communications on E-commerce, 1998–2020

Author:
Susan Ariel Aaronson and Thomas Struett
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
For 22 years, the members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been discussing how to govern e-commerce and the data that underpins it. In 2019, some 74 (now 86) nations began to negotiate e-commerce. These talks are conducted in secret and little is known about how they are progressing. However, WTO members issued a wide range of public comments on both the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and the Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce from 1998, when the work program began, to the present. These communications provide context as well as a window into the negotiations. Using qualitative techniques to analyze these communications, the authors of this paper found that throughout the 22-year period, member states were divided by their understanding, capacity and willingness to set rules governing e-commerce or digital trade. Data, digital prowess and data governance expertise were creating division among members. The paper offers three suggestions for action policy makers could take to address this divide.
Topic:
Communications, Digital Economy, Data, and WTO
Political Geography:
Global Focus

586. The World with and after COVID-19

Author:
Giovanni Tria, Angelo Arcelli, and Robert Fay
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant challenges for all economies, and for the financial sector, in 2020. At the same time, the crisis also brings material opportunities for beneficial change. Policy makers, regulators and governments have the chance to rethink the evolution of the financial systems and international relations to make them fit-for-purpose for what could now be called a “new normal,” where green finance and sustainability will likely become key pillars of the post-pandemic world. Discussions as part of the Financial Regulatory Outlook partnership between CIGI and Oliver Wyman, held virtually on November 23, 2020, focused on how policy makers and financial services leaders can help the industry navigate the risks they face during and after the pandemic and, as a result, build more resilient economies and financial systems for the future.
Topic:
Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

587. War, Terrorism, and Catastrophe in Cyber Insurance: Understanding and Reforming Exclusions

Author:
Jon Bateman
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Cyber insurance is a promising way to contain the havoc cyber attacks wreak, but endless lawsuits hamper its effectiveness. Reforms and new solutions are sorely needed. Insurance is one of the most promising tools for addressing pervasive cyber insecurity. A robust market for insuring cyber incidents could, among other things, financially incentivize organizations to adopt better cyber hygiene—thereby reducing cyber risk for society as a whole. But cyber insurance is not yet mature enough to fulfill its potential, partly due to uncertainty about what kinds of cyber risks are, or can be, insured. Uncertainties in cyber insurance came to a head in 2017, when the Russian government conducted a cyber attack of unprecedented scale. Data-destroying malware called NotPetya infected hundreds of organizations in dozens of countries, including major multinational companies, causing an estimated $10 billion in losses.1 NotPetya showed that cyber risk was greater than previously recognized, with higher potential for “aggregation”—the accumulation of losses across many insurance policies from a single incident or several correlated events. NotPetya also exposed a serious ambiguity in how insurance policies treat state-sponsored cyber incidents. Some property and casualty insurers declined to pay NotPetya-related claims, instead invoking their war exclusions—long-standing clauses that deny coverage for “hostile or warlike action in time of peace and war” perpetrated by states or their agents.2 War exclusions date back to the 1700s, but they had never before been applied to cyber incidents. This novel use of the war exclusion, still being litigated, has raised doubts about whether adequate or reliable coverage exists for state-sponsored cyber incidents. Some observers have asked whether such incidents are insurable at all, given the potential for aggregated cyber losses even more catastrophic than those of NotPetya.3 And while the war exclusion has attracted the most attention, another exclusion—for terrorism—presents similar challenges to cyber claims.
Topic:
Terrorism, War, Cybersecurity, and Non-Traditional Threats
Political Geography:
Global Focus

588. Enduring Cyber Threats and Emerging Challenges to the Financial Sector

Author:
Adrian Nish, Saher Naumaan, and James Muir
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Cybersecurity is a unique challenge for the financial sector. To prevent massive financial losses, banks and other financial institutions should understand how cyber threat groups could launch complex new cyber attacks. At the time of writing, several financial services firms are working to restore their networks following disruptive cyber attacks. Banks in Chile and Seychelles, as well as financial technology companies like Silverlake Axis, a supplier of core banking systems throughout the Asia-Pacific, are all reportedly victims of separate ransom and extortion attempts. Elsewhere, the threat from cyber criminals triggered a suspension of automatic teller machine (ATM) transactions overnight, and hackers recently knocked websites associated with a stock exchange offline using distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. Such disruptions not only impact customers of these services, but also undermine the confidence of peers in the financial services community. Regulators have been taking increasing notice of these cyber threats, and operational resilience has shot to the top of agendas around the world. A few years ago, targeted attacks on financial services sector firms were still relatively rare. However, cases have increased in recent years as capabilities and specialisms such as network intrusion have advanced. BAE Systems in partnership with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has documented public examples via the Timeline of Cyber Incidents Involving Financial Institutions. This timeline serves as a useful resource in tracking trends, even though public cases are just the tip of the iceberg and the true volume of incidents and near misses is much greater.
Topic:
Security, Finance, Non-Traditional Threats, and Cyberspace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

589. Is the Coronavirus Catalyzing New Civic Collaborations for Open Government?

Author:
Abigail Bellows and Nada Zohdy
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The pandemic is spurring elite and grassroots civic actors to cooperate more, but the gulf between them remains wide. Civic actors must seize the opportunity for reform on open government issues. From Africa to Latin America to Europe, the coronavirus pandemic has generated a surge in public demand for government transparency and accountability. To seize this window for reform, elite and grassroots civic actors concerned with open governance must overcome the cleavage that has long existed between them. Thus far, the pandemic has catalyzed some new civic collaborations, but not at the scale or depth needed to seize that window. In general, civil society groups report feeling more isolated during the pandemic. In some places, the urgency of tackling open government issues during the pandemic has helped overcome that isolation by deepening partnerships among existing networks. But in other places, those partnerships have yet to take shape, and new alliances are less likely to form without the benefit of face-to-face interactions. Even the partnerships that have crystallized or deepened do not appear to be changing the fundamental roles of elite and grassroots civic actors. It is possible that this shift may happen over time. Or it may be that the pandemic alone is not enough to dislodge structural barriers to deeper cooperation. The pandemic has dramatically changed the operations of elite and grassroots actors alike. The impact of those changes on collaboration between the two depends on preexisting levels of technological capacity. In places with limited connectivity, the pandemic has exacerbated the digital divide, adversely affecting grassroots actors. Meanwhile, in places with good connectivity, technology is enabling broader (though shallower) participation, laying the groundwork for more elite-grassroots collaboration. Although many civil society groups are struggling financially during the pandemic, those effects are mitigated to some degree by continuing donor interest in the open government sector. This is encouraging, as coalition building requires dedicated, flexible resources. Finally, it is a more dangerous time to be working on open government issues in general, and grassroots actors bear disproportionate risks in doing so. This underscores the need for more vertical alliances to mitigate civic space threats.
Topic:
Civil Society, Government, Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

590. Research Collaboration on Influence Operations Between Industry and Academia: A Way Forward

Author:
Jacob N. Shapiro, Natalie Thompson, and Alicia Wanless
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Research on influence operations requires effective collaboration across industry and academia. Federally funded research and development centers provide a compelling model for multi-stakeholder collaboration among those working to counter influence operations. Research on influence operations requires effective collaboration across industry and academia. Social media platforms are on the front lines of combating influence operations and possess a wealth of unique data and insights. Academics have rigorous training in research methods and relevant theories, and their independence lends credibility to their findings. The skills and knowledge of both groups are critical to answering important questions about influence operations and ultimately finding more effective ways to counter them. Despite shared interest in studying and addressing influence operations, existing institutions do not provide the proper structures and incentives for cross-sector collaboration. Friction between industry and academia has stymied collaboration on a range of important questions such as how influence operations spread, what effects they have, and what impact potential interventions could have. Present arrangements for research collaboration remain ad hoc, small-scale, and nonstandard across platforms and academic institutions. Federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) provide a compelling model for multi-stakeholder collaboration among those working to counter influence operations. Federally funded research institutions—such as the RAND Corporation, the Institute for Defense Analyses, or the MITRE Corporation—have hosted successful cross-sector collaboration between the federal government and academic institutions for more than seventy years. Academic and industry researchers should seek funding and create an analogous institution so the influence operations research community can further collaborative research on shared interests that cannot be addressed with existing models. Drawing from such models, industry would be a primary funder, but governments and philanthropic donors could also contribute to encourage independence and balance.
Topic:
Development, Academia, and Influence
Political Geography:
Global Focus