Day 1: Major challenges from a policy legal and ethical perspective, preventing smallholder farmers benefiting from data sharing
Which major gaps and challenges would you identify in the current scenario from a policy, legal and ethical perspective, which prevent smallholder farmers and communities from benefiting from data-driven agriculture?
1a: Challenges related to accessing data
1b: Challenges related to sharing data
Please focus on the policy, legal and ethical challenges. State the major challenges in a concise and general way, but if possible provide specific examples and say which actors are involved (who benefits, who doesn’t, which actors are perceived as not fulfilling their role).
Focus on the challenges at this stage, not the possible solutions.
Quelles sont les principales lacunes et difficultés identifiées dans le scénario actuel d'un point de vue politique, juridique et éthique, qui empêchent les petits agriculteurs et les communautés de tirer parti de l'agriculture axée sur les données?
1a: Défis liés à l'accès aux données
1b: Défis liés au partage de données
Veuillez-vous concentrer sur les défis politiques, juridiques et éthiques. Énoncez les principaux défis de manière concise et générale, mais si possible, donnez des exemples précis et indiquez quels acteurs sont impliqués (qui en bénéficie, qui ne le fait pas, quels acteurs sont perçus comme ne remplissant pas leur rôle).
Focus sur les défis à ce stade, pas les solutions possibles.
Cuáles son los mayores vacíos y retos que Usted identifica en el escenario actual desde una perspectiva política, legal y ética, que impiden a pequeños agricultores y comunidades beneficiarse de la agricultura basada en datos?
1a: Retos relacionados con el acceso a los datos
1b: Retos relacionados con compartir los datos
Por favor enfóquese en los retos políticos, legales y éticos. Mencione los mayores retos de manera concisa, y de ser posible, de ejemplos específicos y mencione qué actores están involucrados (quiénes se benefician, quiénes no y qué actores se consideran que no cumplen del todo con su rol)Concéntrese en los retos y no en dar posibles soluciones.
Le manque de regulation lois et politique consistant tant sur l'accès au données et le partage des données par les petits et moyens producteurs africains depuis et avant les indépendances est un serieux problème au développement de l'agriculture dans cette zone.
En effet les études sur les models et les stratégies de productions dans le milieu africain avant et meme apres la colonisation (indépendances) n'ont tenu compte le plus souvent ni des droits d'auteurs ni de la propriété intellectuelle.
C'est ainsi que beaucoup de modèles africains ont été améliorés ailleurs sans que les auteurs de ces techniques et innovations gagnent le vrai prix de leur innovation en afrique.
Il sagit aujourdhui d'échanger les données et innovation africaines au meme titre que les grande organisations échangent de toutes les données innovantes sur le marché en tenant compte de leur droits et autres bénéfices.
Des structures telle que la FAO et bien d'autres pourraient accompagner les états africains sur une réglementation et des politiques consolidés dans ce domaine de partage de données.
J'ai des examples concrets sur les biofertilisants, le moringa l'elevage des escargots et des crabes et bien d'autres que la reglementation et les politiques manquantes n'ont pas pu permettre un bon développement en exploitation en Afrique Centrale et de L'Ouest
[Attempt at a translation.]
The lack of consistent laws and policies both on access to data and sharing of data on the part of small and medium African producers, before and after independence, is a serious problem for agricultural development in this region.
In fact, studies on production models and strategies in the African environment, before and even after colonization, often haven't considered copyright nor intellectual property. For this reason, many African models have been improved elsewhere, without the creators of such techniques and innovations being rewarded for their innovation in Africa.
Nowadays, it's a matter of sharing African data and innovation in the same way as big organizations share all innovation data on the market, taking into consideration their rights and other benefits. Structures like FAO and many others could facilitate African countries through consolidated regulation and policies in the domain of data sharing.
I have some concrete examples regarding bio-fertilizers, the moringa, snail and crab breeding, and many others, demonstrating that the lack of regulations and policies hasn't allowed for a smooth development in Africa.
Overarching considerations from a policy and legal perspective.
Firstly I would like highlight that policy and legal constructs should not be seen as two different concepts but rather as a regulatory hierarchy. Often objectives such as “open data” or even just data sharing is not accomplished because of the disjuncture between the policy and legal constructs.
Secondly, I would like to support the preceding arguments around the premature development of legal mechanisms and associated policies. There is a place for the formalisation of legal constructs and the associated policies, but an even more important consideration is the timing of its development. Over the past few years the international data focus was divided between the ever increasing legal construct in support of protection of personal information and cyber security on the one hand and open data initiatives on the other.
1a: Challenges related to accessing data:
More often than not access constrains stem from the lack of access mechanisms such as metadata repositories, data nodes, but more prevalent but less pronounced is the lack of insight in to the data and potential application. I am often faced with the argument that “the data is not available” or “data cannot be accessed”. I then pose the following questions - What data do you need? What do you want to do with the data or wat will the data inform? At this point the discussion normally veer down a rabbit hole of misconstrued user requirements. Thus access to data is severely hindered because of the open endedness of data requests.
The main reasons cited for access constraint, from a governmental perspective (especially for technical data e.g. soil, climate, agricultural potential etc.) relates to the potential misinterpretation of data or an unwillingness that the data be repurposed for competitive advantage.
#Sipiwe Manjengwa: “Smallholder farmers are not given the platform on the policy dialogue and their voices are not heard.” I agree with your statement. But the problem is bigger than that. The Smallholder farmers are often not aware of policy frameworks (e.g. data infrastructure legislation or policies on the sale of data) that can be used to provide access to data.
1b: Challenges related to sharing data:
I also agree - I think the CGIAR's approach is a useful one as it recognises that all data cannot (nor shouold not) be made open - ie open as possible and closed as necessary
The CGIAR Open Access and Data Managemetn Policy stems from – and complies with – the CGIAR Principles on the Management of Intellectual Assets (“CGIAR IA Principles”) which expands on Article 6.1 of the CGIAR IA Principles which provides that “The CGIAR and the Centers shall promptly and broadly disseminate their research results, subject to confidentiality as may be associated with [certain] permitted restrictions, or subject to limited delays to seek IP Rights [(patents, etc.)]”.
When thinking about data sharing, it is useful to think about what benefits farmers are getting for the sharing of their data. Given that there are so many different types of agricultural data that is generated off farms: ie machinery data, financial data, personal data, soil, yield, nutrient and chemical use data etc it is important to distinguish between which types of data farmers are willing to share. Often machinery data etc is willingly shared however personal, financial and production data may be considered more valuable to individiual farmers and what is the incentive being provided to them for sharing this information?
It may be useful to look to the notion of the access and benefit sharing arrangements that are required under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Article 15. The main principles are countries have national sovereignty over their genetic resources, but that there should be facilitated access and benefit sharing under mutually agreed terms and with prior informed consent. The issue of prior informed consent and mutually agreed terms is something that would certainly assist to address the power imbalance between those data aggregators and those farmers who are being asked to share their data ? It is a fair question to ask what is being given in return to those farmers who share their data ?
Open access to data implies its open use. In most cases, this is interpreted as unrestricted use. But to bring accessible data into use requires capacities. Most proponents of open access to data are silent on how the capacities for its use will be generated so that current divides are not exacerbated and new divides will not be created. They are also silent on the logical progression that open technologies would follow open data and information.
For smallholder farmers, the use of ICTs with calls for "open" access to their data and information can be an existential challenge atleast for their near future. As happened in the so called "Green Revolution" in Asia, the use of high yielding seed responsive to better mangement, external farm inputs especially fertilisers and the capacity to market crop surplus while it benefitted many also wrecked havoc for farmers who either did not have these capacities or were not included when inputs were subsidized and markets were protected. In India, these farmers were smallholders who practised dry land, seasonal agriculture. Even today, fifty years after the so called Green revolution, Indian farmers' distress has not abated. It is estimated that more than 500 farmers loose their livelihoods every day and some even suicide.
The comment below is posted on behalf of Joshua Toews
Common sense would suggest that increasing supply of data would increase access to data. Increasing supply would decrease the price, making it more accessible. But even if policy makers find a way to increase the supply of data, there are two problems. First, databases may not be good substitutes for one another. This would limit the competition between database sellers, therefore limiting the downward pressure on the price. Second, to the extent that the databases are good substitutes, this contributes to duplicating work and therefore overall economic inefficiency. Data is non-rival so producing two similar datasets is a waste of time.
In addition to being non-rival, data is also excludable. In this sense, it is similar to infrastructure like telephone lines. This poses a sharing problem as the market for data is likely to tend towards a natural monopoly. If it is firms, rather than governments, that capitalize on a first mover advantage, it is unlikely that these monopolies will fall into the hands of actors who are amenable to sharing the data openly
_______________________________________________________________
E-Consultation Moderators
It might also be unlikely that these monopolies will be in any way accountable and responsive to smallholder farmers with little market bargaining power.
I think making data freely available is the direction to go however, there still exists barriers that need to be surmounted which include;
-The gap between information that anyone can use and the data that anyone can get needs to be plugged. Making data open is not always about licences or the format issues, but it is alsoabout comprehension and access. Open data should not require additional time, resources and expertise to be used.
- There is a significant cost in making quality data Open .The question is who is to bear the cost, Publishers or the users?-What are the tools available to analyze and critic the data?The policies to be formulated and implemented by governments and institutions should address such concerns.
Finally, from an ethical perspective,even with good policies about open data,there is still need for a culture change among individuals and institutions as well as governments to encourage sharing information among stakeholders in the sector
Among the major challenges is a recognition that data can be, and is, often “owned”. Ownership rights accrue most typically not to farmers, but to intermediaries who invest in the aggregation and organization of data. While many in the “open” data community (myself included) would like to believe that data is incapable of being owned, i.e. a common pool resource, or alternatively if owned is owned by farmers about whom or whose land or whose activities the data relates, this is legally incorrect.
For more explanation of the ownership of open data, and possible governance options, you might be interested in this GODAN paper:
http://www.godan.info/documents/ownership-open-data-governance-options-agriculture-and-nutrition-0
What do you think of agricultural data ownership and its impact on farmers (especially small-holder farmers)? What is the best governance option to ensure the benefits of agricultural data are shared inclusively and fairly?
Jeni Tennison at the Open Data Institute also highlights practical and ethical issues around framing this as an ownership issue - she posits instead to quote the title of her article that 'taking control of data is about your rights, not owning it' Tim Davies in his response the piece you cite above, Jeremy also says there are better ways of tackling misuse of personal insights and privacy than closing down data access due to 'ownership' He states: "Uses of data to abuse privacy, or to speculate and manipulate markets may be much better dealt with by regulations and prohibitions on those activities, rather than attempts to restrict the flow of data through assertions of data ownership". Better as you say to improve governance and embed ethical considerations when sharing and opening data; and to embed capacity development in interventions where technology and data is key. Our ethical frameworks and ways to govern what we have produced lag behind the technology but we can't put the genie back in the bottle.