Chapter 2
Do No Digital Harm: Mitigating
Technology Risks in Humanitarian
Contexts
Rahel Dette
2.1 Introduction
… which reminds us of the fact that peripheral populations are being subjected to more or
less experimental technologies.
Katja Lindskov Jacobsen, The Politics of Humanitarian Technology (2015)
In humanitarian emergencies, information communication technologies (ICTs) such
as mobile phones and web-based platforms offer powerful tools for communicating
with communities, remote needs assessments and data collection. A quickly growing
literature confirms the benefits that ICTs can offer to aid efforts with regards to
efficiency, effectiveness and accountability (Raftree and Bamberger 2014; Kalas and
Spurk 2011). These promises are especially pronounced in insecure environments,
where access constraints hinder aid actors from reaching local populations, such that
digital channels could be the only way to send and receive critical information. At the
same time, the potential consequences of implementing technology-based projects
poorly or overseeing unintended consequences can be detrimental and sometimes
lethal.
Recognizing the challenges and risks with technologies can help avoid pitfalls and
unintended digital harm. ICTs are known to introduce complications in a number of
ways: Digital tools themselves alter the interaction between aid staff and recipients,
which can add to and exacerbate crises or conflict dynamics (Jacobsen 2015; Vazquez
and Wall 2014; Altay and Labonte 2014). The digitization of communications introduces new security and privacy risks as data transmitted on electronic devices or
networks becomes susceptible to third party interception and breaches, sometimes
unnoticeably (Internews 2015; Schneier 2015). However, such challenges entangled
with using ICT for humanitarian purposes have not been adequately researched or
addressed in literature and practice. Although concrete proposals for new ethics and
R. Dette (B)
The Berlin-Based Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi), Berlin, Germany
e-mail: rdette@gppi.net
© The Author(s) 2018
S. Hostettler et al. (eds.), Technologies for Development,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91068-0_2
13
Do No Digital Harm: Mitigating
Technology Risks in Humanitarian
Contexts
Rahel Dette
2.1 Introduction
… which reminds us of the fact that peripheral populations are being subjected to more or
less experimental technologies.
Katja Lindskov Jacobsen, The Politics of Humanitarian Technology (2015)
In humanitarian emergencies, information communication technologies (ICTs) such
as mobile phones and web-based platforms offer powerful tools for communicating
with communities, remote needs assessments and data collection. A quickly growing
literature confirms the benefits that ICTs can offer to aid efforts with regards to
efficiency, effectiveness and accountability (Raftree and Bamberger 2014; Kalas and
Spurk 2011). These promises are especially pronounced in insecure environments,
where access constraints hinder aid actors from reaching local populations, such that
digital channels could be the only way to send and receive critical information. At the
same time, the potential consequences of implementing technology-based projects
poorly or overseeing unintended consequences can be detrimental and sometimes
lethal.
Recognizing the challenges and risks with technologies can help avoid pitfalls and
unintended digital harm. ICTs are known to introduce complications in a number of
ways: Digital tools themselves alter the interaction between aid staff and recipients,
which can add to and exacerbate crises or conflict dynamics (Jacobsen 2015; Vazquez
and Wall 2014; Altay and Labonte 2014). The digitization of communications introduces new security and privacy risks as data transmitted on electronic devices or
networks becomes susceptible to third party interception and breaches, sometimes
unnoticeably (Internews 2015; Schneier 2015). However, such challenges entangled
with using ICT for humanitarian purposes have not been adequately researched or
addressed in literature and practice. Although concrete proposals for new ethics and
R. Dette (B)
The Berlin-Based Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi), Berlin, Germany
e-mail: rdette@gppi.net
© The Author(s) 2018
S. Hostettler et al. (eds.), Technologies for Development,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91068-0_2
13