Big data, surveillance and crisis management

Boersma, F.K.; Fonio, C.

doi:10.4324/9781315638423-1

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(49 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As hazards become more complex, the kind of crisis policies necessary to manage them will inevitably require good surveillance practices (Blondin & Boin, 2020; Boin et al, 2014). Yet despite the positive implications of surveillance in the practice of crisis management, it is also crucial to unpack its unitended (and likely negative) consequences (Boersma & Fonio, 2017). To this end, crisis scholars problematize the ‘Janus‐faced’ nature of surveillance in crisis (Finn et al, 2017), and this paper demonstrates how the dark side of surveillance can manifest in LICs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sudden outburst of a creeping crisis can be interpreted as 'willing ignorance on the part of public institutions that were designed to protect citizens', and can subsequently lead to their delegitimization (Boin, Ekengren et al, 2020). We opine that one way to preserve legitimacy is by means of control, with the intention of striking a fine balance between the care and control elements of surveillance (Boersma & Fonio, 2017;Finn et al, 2017). In LICs, however, such control may be excessively done at the expense of care, as demonstrated by the Philippine case.…”

Section: The Face Of Surveillance and Crisis Governance In Licsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Surveillance and pandemic governance in least‐ideal contexts: The Philippine case

Villar

Magnawa

2022

Contingencies & Crisis Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper inquires how surveillance manifests in least‐ideal contexts (LICs), that is, countries with resource constraints, poor governance and proclivity for populism during COVID‐19, and its implications for crisis governance. Using the Philippines as a case, we advance three arguments. First, LICs can become spaces where inappropriate surveillance is undertaken. Second, liminal surveillance practices can become permanent policy fixtures in LICs. Finally, when a prevailing crisis approach of a government is perceived to be inconsistent with the needs of the public, it can lead to a self‐help system among various societal groups and actors. This self‐help system may not necessarily be aligned with the general direction of the national government. As a result, it can perpetuate a disjointed and maladaptive crisis governance approach, where main actors like national governments, and complementary actors like private sector firms, local government units and citizen organizations pursue goals independent of one another.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Face Of Surveillance and Crisis Governance In Licsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveillance and pandemic governance in least‐ideal contexts: The Philippine case

Villar

Magnawa

2022

Contingencies & Crisis Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inclusion in virtual spaces and data sets can expose groups to hazards such as identity theft, surveillance, and misinformation (e.g. Boersma & Fonio, 2018). However, exclusion puts people at greater risk of isolation in times of disaster.…”

Section: E‐resilience and Social Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Humanitarian data justice: A structural data justice lens on civic technologies in post‐earthquake Nepal

Mulder

2020

Contingencies & Crisis Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As disasters are becoming increasingly datafied, social justice in the context of disasters is increasingly bound up with data. A data justice lens reveals how data projects and social justice interlink. This paper approaches social injustice in the context of disasters as structural inequalities in terms of resilience and risk. The first refers to people's ability to prevent, prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters, and the second to the probability that people will be exposed to hazards to which they are vulnerable. A data justice lens draws attention to the ways in which these structural inequalities shape humanitarian data projects. It also shows how such projects influence social justice outcomes. This paper shows how this lens can be applied to concrete disaster settings and the insights this yields for designers and project managers of data projects. This paper uses a qualitative case study approach to analyse two locally led civic technology projects in post-earthquake Nepal. These progressive initiatives sought to give disaster-affected people a role and a voice in the disaster response-and made a valuable contribution to response and recovery efforts. However, as they were rolled out in a context marked by stark social and digital inequalities, they still ended up primarily benefitting those who were relatively more resilient and less at risk. This paper explains why this happened and concludes by recommending critical and strategic collaboration with local progressive digital elites towards greater data justice in disaster settings.

show abstract

“…Technology now acts as an essential mediating infrastructure for communication and collaboration among stakeholders at multiple levels and scales, throughout all phases of a disaster management cycle. Today, professional disaster management systems and bottom‐up, volunteer initiatives processes increasingly rely on digital data, information communication technology (ICT), social media platforms and geospatial information to assess risks, organize recovery efforts, and perform early warnings (Boersma & Fonio, 2018; Meier, 2015; Reuter et al., 2018; Sakurai & Murayama, 2019; Qadir et al., 2016). Technologies furthermore enable and facilitate collective learning processes, thereby broadening our understanding of disaster events and strengthening our response to them (Albris, 2018; Benedikte et al., 2016; Capelo et al., 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%