RDF Manila Human Rights Documentation

From Responsible Data Wiki
Revision as of 05:20, 21 March 2015 by Alixtrot (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

To whom are we responsible?

  • Individuals that are the focus of documentation
  • People who give you info
  • People the info is about
  • People who it is for
  • People you communicate the info to/people who are listening/ppl who use/reuse your data
  • Beneficiaries

To all humans affected by human rights Your documentation team (and yourself) Any community indirectly affected by the data Those who are represented (directly or indirectly) by the data/info Donors and funding bodies Peers

What are we responsible for? Be honest about if you are the right org to be collecting data Using appropriate resources for documentation Mitigating adversarial use of data Thorough/imaginative risk assessments/mitigation stratgies/plans Analysis is correct/defensible; no misrepresentation Cultural/political sensitivities are carefully managed in collection/use Controlled/planned end to project and/or follow through in a sustainable way Clear objectives/goals Positively influence guidelines to good practice Credibility of over data/info Risk/impact of the work Verifiability of data (integrity) How/if/when to publish/share Credbility/integrity/transparency of methods/process Actually using it (not just collecting it) to create positive change Attempt to foresee future risks as times change Representations of data Protecting personal identifialbe data in the broadest sense Simple/straightforward Data connects to advocacy mechanisms that are available Monitoring/inforrming data reuse Follow through particularly if the case is about an individual Rights-based approach to data use/collection Bring it back to the community you collected it/for

How are we held responsible? Legally/contractually Trust/relationship w/ communities and process of bringing data back to the community Legislative/policy frameworks Peers/agreements about good practice Donors/funders Internal guidelines/standards Adversaries (human rights violators) Conscience Media Boards/steering committees Institutional memory/culture Institutional review boards (IRBs at universities) Ethics Data audits/peer review/ external & transpareny reviews