The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which established rights that were established long before technology and artificial intelligence (AI) revolutionised our lives, is celebrating its 75th anniversary this week. The public must be involved in setting the global tech agenda in order to address the demands of a digital future and influence the next 75 years of human rights. This will necessitate empowerment and computer literacy, as well as a shift in research focus from small-scale, one-off initiatives to transnational tactics that support the development of an international grassroots movement.
These days, algorithms influence many facets of our life, including how we look for companions, find homes and jobs, choose what to eat and wear, and consume news. Benefits are accompanied by an increasing list of drawbacks. Unchecked, AI-driven systems could violate human rights when they target people using algorithmic tools for law enforcement purposes, misdiagnose health conditions based on inaccurate data that leaves out women and diverse groups, or arbitrarily deny loans, homes, or jobs for discriminatory or incorrect reasons. Social media behemoths believe they can follow and manipulate our emotions by extracting our most private information; as neurotechnology progresses, we may eventually be able to exercise our right to private and independent thought.
We now require a comparable human rights and technology movement, guided by:
- A worldwide plan for teaching people about their digital rights: Civil society organisations like Our Data Bodies and GNP+ are creating resources to teach people about their digital human rights, but their reach is limited. These kinds of initiatives must go worldwide in order to inform people about their rights and provide them the power to hold AI systems accountable and transparent.
- Global research agenda on AI and human rights: The impact of technology and AI on human rights is being studied in depth by initiatives like Amnesty Tech, Privacy International, the Distributed AI Research Institute, and the Indigenous Protocol and AI working group. Despite their significance, these initiatives are dispersed and run the risk of siloing and duplicating efforts. We require international collaboration in human rights studies, as stated by Cesar Rodriguez-Garavito.
- Funder cooperation: will be necessary to accomplish all of this and to maintain a global grassroots advocacy movement. The Robert Carr Fund for Civil Society Networks, which gathers contributions from a variety of sources for the collaborative, peer-reviewed financing of advocacy networks and coalitions, is a great example from the HIV field.
I am the principle investigator of the Digital Health and Rights Project, where we are implementing some of these concepts. A global steering group of academics, human rights advocates, young adults, and community-led networks of HIV-positive individuals oversees the initiative, which is housed at the University of Warwick. Our collaborative efforts in Colombia, Ghana, Kenya, and Vietnam involve teaching young adults and civil society members in digital literacy and participatory action research. Participants in the study contribute to its design, investigation, and analysis, and it uses its findings to influence policy.
Although we need many more models, we believe that our initiative can serve as one example of community engagement in research, teaching, and policy influence. The digital transition has to prioritise different community voices as the international human rights community looks to the next 75 years.
