Data Extractivism and Social Pollution in Zambia

Approach

The value of personal data as a resource is undeniable. Although it is not a new resource, the ability to harvest it en masse is a relatively new phenomenon, with companies that deal in data harvesting being some of the most valuable in the world. The push to harvest ever more personal data and maximize profit has led to technology companies employing approaches which are extractivist in nature. Just as extractivist approaches in mining, hydrocarbon extraction, agriculture, agroforestry, and others create environmental pollution, these approaches in the technology sector create what can be thought of as social pollution. Some manifestations of social pollution can be seen as global (tech addiction, political polarization, changes to how individuals engage with the world and communities around them, negative impacts on mental health, etc.), while there are also manifestations which occur primarily in the Global South (loss/marginalization of language and culture, de facto imposed changes to cultures, traditions, and ceremonies, etc.). While countries in the Global North are more valuable for big tech companies, countries in the Global South represent the greatest potential for growth and domination. Like many countries in the Global South, Zambia has seen rapid expansion of internet access and smart devices, and in recent years the Zambian government has grappled with developing and implementing regulations on the technology sector and internet, while also promoting tech sector development as an avenue of national development. This article draws upon interviews and surveys with 70 people working in government, technology, and civil society in Zambia to highlight experiences and changes which can be seen as manifestations of social pollution. Interview transcripts, notes, and written parts of surveys were coded in ATLAS.ti utilizing thematic analysis based on data extractivism and social pollution literature. Every respondent highlighted forms of potential social pollution. The article discusses two examples which impact the Zambian context in unique ways. The first is a broad example of a lack of language support for any indigenous languages on major platforms and even local apps and websites. The second focuses on how automated content moderation from Meta (based on different cultural standards) has forced changes to the N’cwala Ceremony, one of the biggest cultural ceremonies in Zambia. Overall, the article highlights how extractivist approaches to personal data harvesting can have unforeseen consequences on cultures, especially in the Global South, and hopes to spark discussion of alternative approaches to technology.

Questions and comments to the author/s

Avatar Preview
October 18, 2024 at 11:10 am

Thank you for the clarity in your presentation and for shedding light on the important concept of social pollution. Your approach offers a compelling framework to address the complexities of data extractivism and its broader implications. Two key questions arise for me: 1)How can we mitigate the risks of "social pollution" when citizen science involves data collection in local communities, ensuring these practices do not become mere forms of digital extractivism?; 2) To what extent is it possible to balance the risks and opportunities of giving digital visibility to the voices of citizens through mobile devices, considering potential consequences on privacy and cultural representation?

Avatar Preview
October 18, 2024 at 1:01 pm

Thank you for your comments and excellent questions! In response:

1) This is a very important question, though I will be a bit pedantic to start my response. I think that in the case of citizen science or researchers collecting data in local communities, the risk would be more of what Grosfoguel terms "epistemic extractivism" (or I've also seen people use the terms "data extractivism", "academic extractivism", and "research extractivism") rather than (personal) data extractivism, as it generally doesn't depend on the mass automated harvesting of personal data (though, it certainly can, depending on the sources). This is actually something that a colleague and I have been wanting to write about to delineate/define more. However, I do think that social pollution can definitely come from this. Overall, I think that for researchers and citizen scientists, the big thing is approaching the communities in an open and responsible way; including communities in the research design, rollout, and collection; handling the data in ways agreed upon with the community (anonymity, who gets to access the data, who gets copies of the data, etc.); and ensuring that all outputs from the data are shared with the community (and, if this is for something profit-generating, then being clear about that from the beginning, and money should primarily go to the community that provided the data). I think that the Te Mana Raraunga (Māori Data Sovereignty Network) guidelines (and those of the Global Indigenous Data Alliance) provide some great approaches to the collection and use of data.

2) This is one of the biggest and toughest questions. In an ideal world, an open-source not-for-profit social network that focuses on privacy and accessibility would take off, and using technologies like Pine Phone (which is modular, allowing for less ewaste, and also greater control over what data is being harvested/collected) and Qubes OS (which allows for compartmentalization of activities on a computer to enhance security and reduce data harvesting) would be more widespread. However, sadly, these remain niche, and many alternative technologies can be daunting for the general public to approach, as they can be more technical. Also If people and groups want to share their message, they need to be on platforms where there are people to receive that message. That user base and ease of use gives platforms like Facebook such a leg up. In my own research, as well as some research I've helped out with, I've seen how in a lot of contexts in Sub-Saharan Africa it is the norm for activists, organizations, and small businesses to have a Facebook page (often instead of a website). It makes sense - one doesn't need to pay money for it, it's easy to do, and most people getting online in those contexts are on Facebook. If you're going to get a message out, you need to go where there are people to hear that message. So, unfortunately, at this point I think that balancing the risks comes down to the individuals/organizations. I think that sensitization of the risks/how to mitigate those risks, how platforms operate, and how to act responsibly are about the best that can be done right now. Though, to be clear, while I think that there is a degree of individual responsibility and ethics when engaging on any digital platform, I do think that there should be much more of an onus put on the platforms/corporations to be better and on governments to hold these corporations accountable. I mention this because of how often I still see people say, "It's all right there in the terms of service! It's people's own fault for not reading them. If they don't like it, they can just not use the service!" as a way to shield corporations from criticism and responsibility.

Avatar Preview
October 22, 2024 at 8:40 am

Dear Christopher (maybe your surname has something to do with Napoleon??), thanks a lot for your comprehensive replies. It is very very useful for our project.

Avatar Preview
October 24, 2024 at 10:17 pm

Dear Christopher.
Thank you very much, Your presentation create a sense of awareness but curious of how we have to see technology in different angles. I was so excited to understand "how" technology and social pollution. However, I would suggest you get more information about what traditions are accompanied by the cultural ceremony which may be it has been hidden or it is hidden publicly because of technology (mobile phone video and pictures) and how now do they perform those cultures (the unexpressed because of technology)?

Avatar Preview
October 25, 2024 at 7:27 am

Dear Christopher, thank you for the thought-provoking insights you've shared. What strategies do you think could help preserve these practices while fostering digital participation?

Please Log In to comment.