Going Viral During a Pandemic: Civil Society and Social Media in Kazakhstan

The covid-19 pandemic forged a more intensely digital world, complicating civil society actors’ menu of options for channeling and framing their advocacy goals. As both a product and study of pandemic-era politics, this dissertation is concerned with understanding how the internet and social media shape associational life in Kazakhstan. I draw on three forms of ethnographic data collected online between October 2020 and February 2022, including semi-structured interviews, visual analysis of social media posts, and digital participant observation. I demonstrate how Kazakhstani civil society actors devise strategies to pursue reform, how they debate theories of political change, and how they exercise agency in a political system that seeks to control the public sphere. I argue that civil society groups use social media platforms to leverage power differentials across levels of administration to advance rights claims and negotiate for reform. Activists and rights defenders flock to various social media platforms because of each site’s unique technological infrastructure. They leverage different logics of visibility and bridge physical and digital forms of contentious politics to demand accountability from an authoritarian government. In addition to providing a more complete understanding of civil society dynamics in Kazakhstan, this study suggests that, in repressive contexts, civil society actors who opt for within-system engagement have not necessarily been coopted and activists do not always take dissent underground. This dissertation is an example of digital political ethnography, which stands to grow not only as a standalone method, but also a bridge to big data analysis in political science. I demonstrate the importance of an ethnographic sensibility while approaching the internet as a site of inquiry to understand political subjectivity

An Annotated Bibliography of Recent Literature on Current Developments in Philanthropy

As philanthropic organizations play an increasingly important role in societies around the world, the research on philanthropy – from giving and volunteering practices to regulatory frameworks to digital innovations – has also evolved in recent decades. It is important to develop a thorough overview of the relevant scientific discourses and literature on current developments in philanthropy. This will allow researchers and practitioners to enhance the understanding of philanthropy and to improve its practice worldwide. This report provides new insights on current developments and important changes in the global philanthropic landscape, including trends in global philanthropy and its interaction with other sectors of society

Process, People, Power and Policy: Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts

This review essay, by Professor Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Dean Bryant Garth, reports on the history and deployment of empirical studies of civil procedure rules, court policies, and legal developments for reforms of court procedures and practices in both the United States and England and Wales. It traces the influence of particular individuals (e.g., Charles Clark in the United States, and Harry Woolf in England) in the use of empirical studies of litigation patterns and court rules to effectuate legal reforms. The essay reviews some particularly contentious issues over time, such as whether there is/was too much or too little litigation, access to courts, discovery practices, evaluations of the effects of particular rules, such as Rule 11 verification requirements, class actions, and practices such as court use of ADR, case management, and pre-trial conferences. The authors argue that empirical research on procedures and policies in courts have mostly been conducted in service of particular reform agendas, with a few exceptions of more pure academic study. The essay concludes with some suggestions for research questions that explore questions of who does the research for what purposes. Do researchers use research to develop their own human capital or legal reform influence? How do we know what optimal rates of court usage are? Can empirical studies shed light on more normative questions about what are optimal levels of process, access to courts, and when justice is delivered in formal court institutions

At the Nexus of Neoliberalism, Mass Incarceration, and Scientific Racism: the Conflation of Blackness with Risk in the 21st century

This paper examines how the systems of power of neoliberalism, scientific racism, and mass incarceration intersect to construct and uphold the image of “black criminality” and “blackness as a risk” to society. Risk assessments used to determine prison sentencing exemplify this phenomenon. Histories of deliberate associations between blackness and criminality--through science, media, political rhetoric, and economic systems--create a field in which risk assessment is widely regarded as a useful and scientifically neutral tool in mass incarceration. Particular scientific, economic, and carceral circumstances culminating in the 21st century collude to elevate risk assessments into one aspect of a big data apparatus endowed with the capacity to predict and control future behaviors. The paper suggests future directions for scientific research to promote racial justice in the context of mass incarceration

Data analytics and algorithms in policing in England and Wales: Towards a new policy framework

RUSI was commissioned by the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (CDEI) to conduct an independent study into the use of data analytics by police forces in England and Wales, with a focus on algorithmic bias. The primary purpose of the project is to inform CDEI’s review of bias in algorithmic decision-making, which is focusing on four sectors, including policing, and working towards a draft framework for the ethical development and deployment of data analytics tools for policing. This paper focuses on advanced algorithms used by the police to derive insights, inform operational decision-making or make predictions. Biometric technology, including live facial recognition, DNA analysis and fingerprint matching, are outside the direct scope of this study, as are covert surveillance capabilities and digital forensics technology, such as mobile phone data extraction and computer forensics. However, because many of the policy issues discussed in this paper stem from general underlying data protection and human rights frameworks, these issues will also be relevant to other police technologies, and their use must be considered in parallel to the tools examined in this paper. The project involved engaging closely with senior police officers, government officials, academics, legal experts, regulatory and oversight bodies and civil society organisations. Sixty nine participants took part in the research in the form of semi-structured interviews, focus groups and roundtable discussions. The project has revealed widespread concern across the UK law enforcement community regarding the lack of official national guidance for the use of algorithms in policing, with respondents suggesting that this gap should be addressed as a matter of urgency. Any future policy framework should be principles-based and complement existing police guidance in a ‘tech-agnostic’ way. Rather than establishing prescriptive rules and standards for different data technologies, the framework should establish standardised processes to ensure that data analytics projects follow recommended routes for the empirical evaluation of algorithms within their operational context and evaluate the project against legal requirements and ethical standards. The new guidance should focus on ensuring multi-disciplinary legal, ethical and operational input from the outset of a police technology project; a standard process for model development, testing and evaluation; a clear focus on the human–machine interaction and the ultimate interventions a data driven process may inform; and ongoing tracking and mitigation of discrimination risk

50 Years after the Civil Rights Act: The Ongoing Work for Racial Justice in the 21st Century

This report documents the state of civil and human rights, and paints a persuasive picture of just how far the United States still has to go to make racial justice a reality. The report also makes a series of policy recommendations in the areas of justice reform, education, employment, hate violence, housing, human rights, immigration policy, media and technology, and voting. This Report commemorates the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act and the 20 years since the United States ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights collaborated with 39 other organizations in 2014 in documenting their concerns and recommendations for progress under the treaty. According to the report, while progress has been made, the U.S. still struggles on many fronts. The Leadership Conference addresses racial justice and highlights many of the issues that remain important today