Federated data as a commons

a third way to subject-centric and collective-centric approaches to data epistemology and politics

Journal Article (2022)
Author(s)

Stefano Calzati (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)

Research Group
Urban Data Science
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-09-2021-0097 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2022
Language
English
Research Group
Urban Data Science
Journal title
Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society
Issue number
1
Volume number
21
Pages (from-to)
16-29
Downloads counter
218
Collections
Institutional Repository
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Purpose: This study advances a reconceptualization of data and information which overcomes normative understandings often contained in data policies at national and international levels. This study aims to propose a conceptual framework that moves beyond subject- and collective-centric normative understandings. Design/methodology/approach: To do so, this study discusses the European Union (EU) and China’s approaches to data-driven technologies highlighting their similarities and differences when it comes to the vision underpinning how tech innovation is shaped. Findings: Regardless of the different attention to the subject (the EU) and the collective (China), the normative understandings of technology by both actors remain trapped into a positivist approach that overlooks all that is not and cannot be turned into data, thus hindering the elaboration of a more holistic ecological thinking merging humans and technologies. Originality/value: Revising the philosophical and political debate on data and data-driven technologies, a third way is elaborated, i.e. federated data as commons. This third way puts the subject as part by default of a collective at the centre of discussion. This framing can serve as the basis for elaborating sociotechnical alternatives when it comes to define and regulate the mash-up of humans and technology.