WPF Statement to the Civil Society Consultation on Sustainable Health Security Preparedness and Response, C20, 2021

The World Privacy Forum attended the C20 Civil Society Consultation on Sustainable Health Security Preparedness 20 April, 2021, part of the preparation for the G20 health-related declaration. (Rome Declaration.) WPF presented an intervention at this event and in addition submitted a written statement. See: Statement of WPF (PDF, 2 pages).

WPF Statement to the Civil Society Consultation on Sustainable Health Security Preparedness and Response, C20, 2021

20 April, 2021

The World Privacy Forum is pleased to submit our statement to the Civil Society Consultation on Sustainable Health Security Preparedness. WPF is a member of the Global Health Working Group, and is an NGO that focuses on digital health, data governance, and data protection and privacy. See www.worldprivacyforum.org for additional information and more of our work.

In response to the question of what is required at global, regional and national levels to ensure effective multilateral, multi-sectoral co-operation to prevent, prepare for and respond to global health crises, we have learned that one of the deep lessons of this pandemic is that in a global public health crisis, knowledge is power. Usable public health knowledge requires many systemic building blocks, particularly global cooperation regarding public health data ecosystems that function robustly, interoperatively, and fairly across all jurisdictions.

To ensure equal development of a genuinely sustainable, effective, and fair global public health data ecosystem it will be essential to accomplish baseline capacities in three areas:

Ensure presence of baseline health data ecosystem capacity in all jurisdictions, inclusive of public health data and global collaboration regarding equitable distribution of health data systems. Many Low and Middle Income Country (LMIC) jurisdictions will need assistance to bring digital health systems online and fully up to speed. Note the findings and interviews in our 2020 multi-jurisdiction / multi-stakeholder research regarding LMICs and the COVID-19 response, Governing Data for Development: Trends, challenges, and opportunities https://www.worldprivacyforum.org/2020/11/governing-data-for-development-trends-challenges-and-opportunities/ Michael Pisa, Pam Dixon, Benno Ndulu et al, Center for Global Development, World Privacy Forum.

Ensure trust in health data ecosystems by ensuring that robust data governance, privacy protections, and human rights protections are in place in all public health data collections, exchanges, and uses. As of this year, 145 jurisdictions globally have passed comprehensive data protection legislation. However, public health data governance is still fragmented, for a number of reasons. These challenges can be solved with well-understood governance, protections, and granular implementation guidance specific to national, regional, and global public health data ecosystems.

Ensure interoperability of public health data by encouraging the use of agreed-upon, international standards for data that are achievable by all jurisdictions including LMICs. In the past, LMICs have not always been represented robustly in standards making processes, something which now can and must be corrected.

To summarize, for an effective and high functioning public health data ecosystem, fair, and human-centered governance inclusive of privacy, interoperability, and equitably distributed access to such systems across all jurisdictions, are among the key components that build sustainability of public health data ecosystems. Thank you for holding this civil society consultation.

Pam Dixon, Executive Director

World Privacy Forum

Posted April 20, 2021 in C20, Digital Health Ecosystems, G20, Global Health, Health Privacy, LMIC, Public Health
Tags: # data ecosystems

New Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools

We are pleased to announce the publication of a new WPF report, “Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools.” This report sets out a definition of AI governance tools, documents why and how these tools are critically important for trustworthy AI, and where these tools are around the world. The report also documents problems in some AI governance tools themselves, and suggests pathways to improve AI governance tools and create an evaluative environment to measure their effectiveness. AI systems should not be deployed without simultaneously evaluating the potential adverse impacts of such systems and mitigating their risks, and most of the world agrees about the need to take precautions against the threats posed. The specific tools and techniques that exist to evaluate and measure AI systems for their inclusiveness, fairness, explainability, privacy, safety and other trustworthiness issues — called in the report collectively AI governance tools – can improve such issues. While some AI governance tools provide reassurance to the public and to regulators, the tools too often lack meaningful oversight and quality assessments. Incomplete or ineffective AI governance tools can create a false sense of confidence, cause unintended problems, and generally undermine the promise of AI systems. The report contains rich background details, use cases, potential solutions to the problems discussed in the report, and a global index of AI Governance Tools.
National IDs Around the World — Interactive map

About this Data Visualization: This interactive map displays the presence...
Report: From the Filing Cabinet to the Cloud: Updating the Privacy Act of 1974

This comprehensive report and proposed bill text is focused on the Privacy Act of 1974, an important and early Federal privacy law that applies to the government sector and some contractors. The Privacy Act was written for the 1970s information era -- an era that was characterized by the use of mainframe computers and filing cabinets. Today's digital information era looks much different than the '70s: smart phones are smarter than the old mainframes, and documents are now routinely digitized and stored and perhaps even analyzed in the cloud, among many other changes. The report focuses on why the Privacy Act needs an update that will bring it into this century, and how that could look and work. This work was written by Robert Gellman, and informed by a two-year multi-stakeholder process.