How to incorporate public values in technology again

This is part 1 in a series of articles on the Net Politics Masterclass 2022.

On Monday 17 October 2022, this case was discussed in the first Masterclass Netpolitics, organized by Waag (at the Waag, Amsterdam). In eight meetings, speakers from various organisations (including Amnesty International, Bits of Freedom, Internet Society and Netwerk Democratie) highlighted the functioning of the digital system and its impact on society and daily life. So that you can make informed choices about the use of technology. The approximately twenty participants in this masterclass have different backgrounds: from advisor or policy officer at the municipality, province or other government body, researcher, to tech journalist. There are many 'linking pins' between the participants – such as previous collaboration between Informaat and the municipality of Amsterdam on the IRMA app.

We all know recent examples of unwanted impact of technology: from privacy violation through data breaches, discrimination in the use of algorithms to manipulation in elections by bots. But how can you make the world behind digital services transparent and design 'neutral' technology?

For this purpose, Waag has developed the so-called public stack method as a tool. The starting point is that a digital service is made up of different layers, each with its own function:

1. The foundation (underlying values and principles).
2. The design process (open or closed).
3. The technology itself (open or closed).
4. The perspective on the user (consumer, object or citizen).

In the method, the ideal, a Public Stack, is compared to two other types: a State Stack and Private Stack. In a Public Stack, public values are central, the design process is open, the technology is open and the user is treated as a citizen with associated rights. A State Stack and a Private Stack are driven by government control and profit/commercial interests respectively.

In the masterclass, a nice discussion ensued over the distinction and the descriptions of the three stacks. The stacks are drawn in black and white and therefore do not match the grey practice. For example, a large banking company can develop technology for commercial purposes, but in addition to profit, also include public values such as inclusion, accessibility or sustainability.

I think the added value of the Waag method lies mainly in asking critical questions about the four layers of a digital service. Take the aforementioned example of the municipality that wants to use a drone for a digital copy of a neighborhood:

1. What are the underlying (public) values on which the choice to use a drone is based? Cost savings? Sustainability?
2. Have residents of the district been (sufficiently) involved in the decision? Have alternatives been presented?
3. (How long and where) are the drone images stored? Who has access to these images? Are they accessible/retrievable for residents?
4. Are digital civil rights sufficiently guaranteed?

In a break-out room, a small group then discussed why it is so difficult to develop services within the government according to the Public Stack method. A participant working for the government said that public values in the choice of software are in fact a non-issue, 'it is seen as whining'. The focus is on compliancy (implementation within the framework of the law) and on cost reduction - which is often complicated enough.

A solution may lie in more design thinking within the government, legal records of public values in technology and applying assessments within selection processes for certain technology. Embedding this is not easy: many government organizations are large and unwieldy and decision-making takes place on multiple levels. But at the same time, the government can no longer ignore citizens and organizations, such as Waag or Bits of Freedom, who demand more openness and ask critical questions.

In a next session of the masterclass, the governance of the digital infrastructure will be on the agenda. Which organizations have shaped the internet and are now pulling the strings? And what is the effect of this on the internet itself and on our society? A fascinating subject, of which I know little (presumably not being the only one) because internet governance is so invisible.