大数据研究中的多样性和新殖民主义:在与家长式主义斗争的同时避免榨取主义

IF 6.5 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Big Data & Society Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/20539517231206802
Paula Helm, Amalia de Götzen, Luca Cernuzzi, Alethia Hume, Shyam Diwakar, Salvador Ruiz Correa, Daniel Gatica-Perez
{"title":"大数据研究中的多样性和新殖民主义:在与家长式主义斗争的同时避免榨取主义","authors":"Paula Helm, Amalia de Götzen, Luca Cernuzzi, Alethia Hume, Shyam Diwakar, Salvador Ruiz Correa, Daniel Gatica-Perez","doi":"10.1177/20539517231206802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The extractive logic of Big Data-driven technology and knowledge production has raised serious concerns. While most criticism initially focused on the impacts on Western societies, attention is now increasingly turning to the consequences for communities in the Global South. To date, debates have focused on private-sector activities. In this article, we start from the conviction that publicly funded knowledge and technology production must also be scrutinized for their potential neocolonial entanglements. To this end, we analyze the dynamics of collaboration in an European Union-funded research project that collects data for developing a social platform focused on diversity. The project includes pilot sites in China, Denmark, the United Kingdom, India, Italy, Mexico, Mongolia, and Paraguay. We present the experience at four field sites and reflect on the project’s initial conception, our collaboration, challenges, progress, and results. We then analyze the different experiences in comparison. We conclude that while we have succeeded in finding viable strategies to avoid contributing to the dynamics of unilateral data extraction as one side of the neocolonial circle, it has been infinitely more difficult to break through the much more subtle but no less powerful mechanisms of paternalism that we find to be prevalent in data-driven North–South relations. These mechanisms, however, can be identified as the other side of the neocolonial circle.","PeriodicalId":47834,"journal":{"name":"Big Data & Society","volume":"113 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diversity and neocolonialism in Big Data research: Avoiding extractivism while struggling with paternalism\",\"authors\":\"Paula Helm, Amalia de Götzen, Luca Cernuzzi, Alethia Hume, Shyam Diwakar, Salvador Ruiz Correa, Daniel Gatica-Perez\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20539517231206802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The extractive logic of Big Data-driven technology and knowledge production has raised serious concerns. While most criticism initially focused on the impacts on Western societies, attention is now increasingly turning to the consequences for communities in the Global South. To date, debates have focused on private-sector activities. In this article, we start from the conviction that publicly funded knowledge and technology production must also be scrutinized for their potential neocolonial entanglements. To this end, we analyze the dynamics of collaboration in an European Union-funded research project that collects data for developing a social platform focused on diversity. The project includes pilot sites in China, Denmark, the United Kingdom, India, Italy, Mexico, Mongolia, and Paraguay. We present the experience at four field sites and reflect on the project’s initial conception, our collaboration, challenges, progress, and results. We then analyze the different experiences in comparison. We conclude that while we have succeeded in finding viable strategies to avoid contributing to the dynamics of unilateral data extraction as one side of the neocolonial circle, it has been infinitely more difficult to break through the much more subtle but no less powerful mechanisms of paternalism that we find to be prevalent in data-driven North–South relations. These mechanisms, however, can be identified as the other side of the neocolonial circle.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47834,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Big Data & Society\",\"volume\":\"113 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Big Data & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231206802\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Big Data & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231206802","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大数据驱动的技术和知识生产的抽取逻辑引发了严重的担忧。虽然大多数批评最初集中在对西方社会的影响上,但现在越来越多的注意力转向对全球南方社区的影响。迄今为止,辩论主要集中在私营部门的活动上。在本文中,我们从这样一个信念开始,即公共资助的知识和技术生产也必须仔细审查它们潜在的新殖民主义纠缠。为此,我们在一个欧盟资助的研究项目中分析了合作的动态,该项目收集数据,用于开发一个专注于多样性的社交平台。该项目的试点地点包括中国、丹麦、英国、印度、意大利、墨西哥、蒙古和巴拉圭。我们介绍了四个实地站点的经验,并反思了项目的初始概念、我们的合作、挑战、进展和结果。然后,我们分析不同的经验进行比较。我们的结论是,虽然我们成功地找到了可行的战略,以避免助长作为新殖民主义圈子一方的单方面数据提取的动态,但要突破我们发现在数据驱动的北南关系中普遍存在的更为微妙但同样强大的家长制机制,难度要大得多。然而,这些机制可以被认为是新殖民主义圈子的另一面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diversity and neocolonialism in Big Data research: Avoiding extractivism while struggling with paternalism
The extractive logic of Big Data-driven technology and knowledge production has raised serious concerns. While most criticism initially focused on the impacts on Western societies, attention is now increasingly turning to the consequences for communities in the Global South. To date, debates have focused on private-sector activities. In this article, we start from the conviction that publicly funded knowledge and technology production must also be scrutinized for their potential neocolonial entanglements. To this end, we analyze the dynamics of collaboration in an European Union-funded research project that collects data for developing a social platform focused on diversity. The project includes pilot sites in China, Denmark, the United Kingdom, India, Italy, Mexico, Mongolia, and Paraguay. We present the experience at four field sites and reflect on the project’s initial conception, our collaboration, challenges, progress, and results. We then analyze the different experiences in comparison. We conclude that while we have succeeded in finding viable strategies to avoid contributing to the dynamics of unilateral data extraction as one side of the neocolonial circle, it has been infinitely more difficult to break through the much more subtle but no less powerful mechanisms of paternalism that we find to be prevalent in data-driven North–South relations. These mechanisms, however, can be identified as the other side of the neocolonial circle.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Big Data & Society
Big Data & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
10.60%
发文量
59
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Big Data & Society (BD&S) is an open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes interdisciplinary work principally in the social sciences, humanities, and computing and their intersections with the arts and natural sciences. The journal focuses on the implications of Big Data for societies and aims to connect debates about Big Data practices and their effects on various sectors such as academia, social life, industry, business, and government. BD&S considers Big Data as an emerging field of practices, not solely defined by but generative of unique data qualities such as high volume, granularity, data linking, and mining. The journal pays attention to digital content generated both online and offline, encompassing social media, search engines, closed networks (e.g., commercial or government transactions), and open networks like digital archives, open government, and crowdsourced data. Rather than providing a fixed definition of Big Data, BD&S encourages interdisciplinary inquiries, debates, and studies on various topics and themes related to Big Data practices. BD&S seeks contributions that analyze Big Data practices, involve empirical engagements and experiments with innovative methods, and reflect on the consequences of these practices for the representation, realization, and governance of societies. As a digital-only journal, BD&S's platform can accommodate multimedia formats such as complex images, dynamic visualizations, videos, and audio content. The contents of the journal encompass peer-reviewed research articles, colloquia, bookcasts, think pieces, state-of-the-art methods, and work by early career researchers.
期刊最新文献
Is there a role of the kidney failure risk equation in optimizing timing of vascular access creation in pre-dialysis patients? From rules to examples: Machine learning's type of authority Outlier bias: AI classification of curb ramps, outliers, and context Artificial intelligence and skills in the workplace: An integrative research agenda Redress and worldmaking: Differing approaches to algorithmic reparations for housing justice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1