Drawing on the first comprehensive investigation into the uses of data analytics in UK public services, this article outlines developments and practices surrounding the upsurge in data-driven forms of what we term 'citizen scoring'. This refers to the use of data analytics in government for the purposes of categorisation, assessment and prediction at both individual and population level. Combining Freedom of Information requests and semi-structured interviews with public sector workers and civil society organisations, we detail the practices surrounding these developments and the nature of concerns expressed by different stakeholder groups as a way to elicit the heterogeneity, tensions and negotiations that shape the contemporary landscape of data-driven governance. Described by practitioners as a way to achieve a 'golden view' of populations, we argue that data systems need to be situated in this context in order to understand the wider politics of such a 'view' and the implications this has for state-citizen relations in the scoring society.
This article analyses three distinct child welfare data systems in England. We focus on child welfare as a contested area in public services where data systems are being used to inform decisionmaking and transforming governance. We advance the use of "data assemblage" as an analytical framework to detail how key political and economic factors influence the development of these data systems. We provide an empirically grounded demonstration of why child welfare data systems must not be considered neutral decision aid tools. We identify how systems of thought, ownership structures, policy agendas, organizational practices, and legal frameworks influence these data systems. We find similarities in the move toward greater sharing of sensitive data, but differences in attitudes toward public-private partnerships, rights and uses of prediction. There is a worrying lack of information available about the impacts of these systems on those who are subject to themparticularly in relation to predictive data systems. We argue for policy debates to go beyond technical fixes and privacy concerns to engage with fundamental questions about the power dynamics and rights issues linked to the expansion of data sharing in this sector as well as whether predictive data systems should be used at all.
There is an abundance of enthusiasm and optimism about how governments at all levels can make use of big data, algorithms and artificial intelligence. There is also growing concern about the risks that come with these new systems. This article makes the case for greater government transparency and accountability about uses of big data through a Government of Canada qualitative research case study. Adapting a method from critical cartographers, I employ countermapping to map government big data practices and internal discussions of risk and challenge. I do so by drawing on interviews and freedom of information requests. The analysis reveals that there are more concerns and risks than often publicly discussed and that there are significant areas of silence that need greater attention. The article underlines the need for our democratic systems to respond to our new datafied contexts by ensuring that our institutions make changes to better protect citizen rights, uphold democratic principles and ensure means for citizen intervention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.