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

Abstract

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.

Coloniality and frictions: Data-driven humanitarianism in North-Eastern Nigeria and South Sudan

“…Epistemic injustices come together here with structural injustices, as data is extracted from the communities who are supposed to be ‘served’ by humanitarians, effectively advancing existing structures of domination (cf. Mudler, 2020).…”

“… 6. There is much to unpack here in terms of how more participatory and less extractive data practices might be developed in the provision of protection and assistance (see Aiken et al, 2022). Critical analysis of the potential and limitations of data-driven humanitarianism here is timely in this regard (Dekker et al, 2022; Mulder, 2020; Mulder et al, 2016), particularly given the emphasis on the coloniality of humanitarian data that we have shown in this article to be an increasing concern on the part of many humanitarians themselves.…”

Technological Mediation for Disaster Risk Management

“…The questions she raises around the reliability and usefulness of externally sourced data for disaster response, feed into paper two, drawing attention to pre‐existing and emerging inequalities for affected communities in data‐related projects for disaster risk management. Here, Femke Mulder (2020) uses post‐earthquake Nepal as a case study to explore digital and virtual divides among different groups in disasters. By bridging perspectives on social capital (Lin et al., 2001; Van de Walle & Comes, 2015), e‐resilience (Ospina & Heeks, 2010) and data justice, Femke argues that people who are unable to participate, access and mobilize assets and ties through ICTs before, during and after disasters are at higher risk.…”

Data Justice in Practice: A Guide for Developers

“…Taylor, 2017, p. 14 Nussbaum, 2006;Sen, 1999; Taylor, 2019 5 https://datajusticelab.org; https://globaldatajustice.org understandings of data justice will continue to inform this work while additional perspectives, collected through our Policy Pilot Partners, our data justice survey, and our accompanying literature review broaden this definition even further.6 Akbari, 2019;Cinnamon, 2019;Dagne, 2020;Kennedy et al, 2019;Kidd, 2019;Mulder, 2020;Punathambekar & Mohan, 2019 …”