C20 – G20 Global Dialogue on Health, WPF statement

On August 4, 2021, WPF participated as a member of the Civil20 – G20 Global Dialogue on Health. The dialogue was moderated by C20 Global Health co-chair Rachel Ong, with concluding comments by co-chair Kurt Frieder. Davide La Cecilia, Diplomatic adviser to the Italian Minister for Health and former Ambassador of Italy to Ukraine, participated from the G20. The C20-G20 Dialogues are a key part of the policy process culminating in the G20 meetings in October.

WPF Statement at the Global Dialogue on Health:

“The global pandemic has revealed meaningful gaps in local, regional, national, and global public health and health care systems. As Ambassador La Cecilia has eloquently stated in this meeting, health data ecosystems are now in the process of undergoing rapid changes at multiple levels. As countries strive to adapt and finance improved systems, we must ensure that improved health systems serve people and the planet, are trustworthy, fair and non-biased, and include robust health data governance, privacy, cybersecurity, and data equity built in to the ecosystem. These qualities are essential to earn and keep patients’ and other stakeholders’ trust in health ecosystems, which is a crucial component for success against COVID-19 and other pressing health challenges.”

Posted August 4, 2021 in C20, COVID-19, Data and Development, Digital Health Ecosystems, Governance, Health Privacy

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.