To avoid data colonisation and allow for genuine empowerment, people must control the data they generate.
Around the turn of the century, companies started realising the economic value of data. Google started monetizing it, tailoring ads based on search queries. Facebook did pretty much the same thing years later, in the context of social media.
What these companies were doing was essentially using data for commerce to understand a customer’s preferences and selling her just what she wanted (sometimes even if she didn’t know what that was). Between 2000 and 2010, data was used largely for this kind of monetization.
Over the past five years, the new thing has been the use of data in Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI has been around as an idea for 40 years but the availability of data, a lot of it, changed its contours. The breakthrough was deep learning, which uses layers of neural networks to automate problem-solving.
Thanks to data, software and machines have become more intelligent.
Deep learning, combined with Big Data, is at the core of everything from image recognition to self-driving cars. AI has meant an even further increase in the value of data—it isn’t just about commerce now, but about automation and intelligence.
Data is the oil of the twenty-first century.
To look at how data can disrupt, one need look no further than the digital advertising business in the United States of America (US) and the payments business in China. In the US, Google and Facebook have a 71 per cent share of total digital advertising spending. In 2015-16, they captured 89 per cent of all incremental digital advertising.
China’s mobile payments are a staggering $5.5 trillion. The Chinese have done an amazing job of using QR codes for payments. These payments are dominated by two companies—Alipay, part of the Alibaba Group, and Tencent Holdings’ WeChat. These two companies own over 90 per cent of the payments market in China.
Interestingly, data combined with AI creates scale and speed.
Take Netflix in the US. Ten years back, Netflix was stuffing a DVD in a FedEx envelope and sending it to people. Today, it has over 100 million customers worldwide. It also has data on who is watching what, when, how, and what they like. It is using this data to help create better programming. When Netflix began, it was not in the content business but in the distribution business. It started with DVDs, and then video-streamed content it didn’t own. In 2013, it started creating its own content. Its first show was House Of Cards. This year, Netflix got 93 nominations at the Emmy awards. HBO, the grand old company of TV content, had 110.
That’s the power of data.
But where is this data coming from?
Out of 5.5 billion people in the world over the age of 14, 2.5 billion have a smartphone. By 2020, every person will have four personal digital devices. The Internet of Things will soon bring 50 billion devices online.
Smart companies have realised this. Apple, Google, GE, Siemens, Amazon, Tencent, Baidu—all are moving from products and pipes to platforms. These platforms enable products that solve problems, but they also capture and own data produced in the interaction. They also use the data produced to become better at what they do. That, in turn, attracts more customers, generating more data.
Data is its own means. It is an unlimited non-rivalrous resource. Yet, it isn’t shared freely. What began as a differentiator is now the model itself. Platforms that accumulate user data disrupt industries wield disproportionate influence and create silos. This leads to data domination.
The world is just waking up to this. India should too.
There are multiple risks from data domination: violation of privacy, data colonisation, and a winner-takes-all scenario that stifles innovation and competition. This isn’t just a technology challenge but also a policy one.
We must invert the data. It has to be owned by the user and used only with her consent. Individuals should be in control of their data. It should be used to empower the individual, not the state, or the companies.
What we need, apart from a strong data protection law, is an efficient consent process. This could take the form of data consent, Application Programming Interfaces (APIs )that allow consent collection, storage, and audits. And at any time, users have the right to pull out their data. They can choose what they want to be part of, and what they don’t.
This prevents data colonisation, yet enables and empowers AI. It tilts the privacy debate in favour of the user. And it creates real user choice at every level. Data is empowering in the hands of people. Inverting it allows freedom and choice. This is data democracy.
Given the speed at which Indians are adopting the digital life, India will go from a data-poor country to a data-rich one in three years. India has a unique digital infrastructure, a set of serendipitously developed public APIs, such as eSign, Unified Payments Interface, Bharat Interface for Money, the Goods and Services Tax Network and eKYC, developed as public goods.
It also has a robust authentication infrastructure. India is the only country in the world that can empower every resident with her own data, thanks to the technology infrastructure for inversion of data available due to Aadhaar and India Stack. What it now needed is a standard and secure consent process for users to get their own data to advance their lives and a data protection law.
Together, these can enrich India and Indians.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)