Locus Charter
CC Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives 4.0 International:
You are free to use, copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in unchanged form for any legal and non-commercial purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
McKenzie, Denise
The Locus Charter is an international set of principles and guidance for ethical and good practice in using location data. In 2019 the Omidyar Network funded 2 programmes of work looking at ethical implications of using location data - Benchmark Initiative in the UK and EthicalGEO in the USA. Since then the world has seen an unprecedented situation arise with the spread of COVID-19 across most countries in the world. Location data has been at the fore of understand, predicting and trying to manage the outbreak. A key topic that has arisen during this has been the question “what constitutes ethical use of location data?” This is being openly debated particularly in the use of contact tracing apps that are being developed by many governments across the world. The Locus Charter is a collaboration between the teams a Benchmark and EthicalGEO to develop an agreed set of international principles to help guide practitioners towards the ethical and responsible use of location data in their projects. The program will be reaching its public consultation phase in June.
 Thanks, Nick. Just for those of you who don't know me, which I know many of you probably were last year's Fossbore G UK, where I spoke a bit about ethics and I talked a bit about diversity as well at that one. But my name's Denise McKenzie. I'm one of the co-directors of the thing called the Benchmark Initiative out of Geovation, which is what I'll be talking about today. Also in the broader community, I'm the chair of the AGI and also sit on the steering committee for the Women and Geospatial Group as well. So today I want to talk to you a bit about a thing called the Locust Charter and also the Benchmark Initiative. I can get my PowerPoints work. Brilliant. Okay, so to give you a little bit of background then, Benchmark Initiative started last year around October. It's an initiative that is run through Geovation, so obviously Ordnance Survey's Accelerator arrangement in London, but is funded out of the immediate network and from a section of immediate that's now become called the Place Fund. Part of that also is that immediate funded a complimentary piece of work in the United States called Ethical Geo, which had a slightly different focus to Benchmark, but is very, very complimentary to what it is that we're doing as well. So in essence, what Benchmark is all about is actually initially a thought leadership program. And it was a thought leadership program really focused on looking at that ethical application of location data. So the objectives that we were really looking at trying to do was, I guess, initially to start to help people better understand what the arena of Geospatial Data Ethics is all about. But what Benchmark was specifically asked to do is sort of not get bogged in just research, but to look at real world tools and applications that we can actually use now. It was also about looking at addressing the risks and opportunities. We really were told to generate international discussions, so part of that is why I'm talking to you all today. And importantly, I really liked that we were asked to make a positive impact in the global community. So we, they didn't want this to just sort of be yet another talking shop exercise. They wanted something that was going to go out and help change things. So what's been involved so far? We did have a face-to-face summit series, which is obviously now virtual, like everything else. We put a call out for an entrepreneur program, and we've got four entrepreneurs working with us at the moment. And it's a real mixed bag of things that we're doing. We're looking at tools for understanding ethical implications of using things like development data. We're looking at methods of anonymisation, for transport data. We're looking at a web game, and the Location Data Ethics web game is really trying to look at that. How do we educate people? How do we get people to understand what the implications of this all is? And the last one that we've got starting really soon is, obviously, a little bit related to what's happened recently as regards COVID. We've got a new entrepreneur starting with us that's beginning to look at ethical methods for the tracing apps as well. But the one I want to talk to you today about has been a recent addition in the last couple of months, and that's the Locust Charter. So I should say this is not just a benchmark initiative. One of the things about the Locust Charter is that this is a partnership between us and that complementary group, Ethical Geo over in the United States. And I think more broadly, what we view it as between our two groups is not just ours, but actually the Geospatial Communities Charter. So whilst we're getting the conversation going and we're helping during the writing, actually what we really hope is that this will be a charter for everybody to use. So why are we doing it? This is really kind of, I guess, a list of things that I've learnt out of the process of being involved in benchmark. Getting to grips with what Ethical Location is is really hard for a lot of people to understand. What I have experienced along the way in talking to lots of people though is that really most practitioners, and I'm sure many of you that are on the call right now, actually really want to do the right thing. No one actively wants to go out and be unethical, really. I mean, I'm sure there's many bad people out there, but most of the practitioners that we deal with really are interested in doing the right thing. But there's just not enough practical guidance on what that is and how to go about doing that. There does seem to be a number of emerging guides about data generally, but none that are kind of focused on the nuances, if you like, of our geospatial data. And I think if you look across what's happened in the last three months, we've gone from a situation where, yeah, people are a bit concerned about location privacy, but still didn't really understand much of it to a situation where tracing apps are on the front page of the Guardian. We've got major inquiries happening in the United States about geofencing being used in law enforcement around the protests that are happening at the moment. And more and more and more, there's questions about exposure of privacy and people's personal private location data as well. So in reading all of that amazing suite of articles, and I will say that myself and my co-director, Ben, struggle, I think, at times to keep up with everything that keeps appearing in the media at the moment on this. But what we've really learned is that there is a huge need at the moment for a better language for us to communicate what we're doing with location data and how we're doing the right thing. So the Locust Charter, and you're seeing there a grayed out section there are called and framework, because what's starting to emerge is that what we're doing is probably a lot bigger than just a charter. But I'll leave that in gray because it's really the kind of new addition part of this. But it's about trying to set out, if you like, an international set of principles and guidance for that responsible practice. And the reason we're doing that is that we don't want location data to be stifled. At the end of the day, we actually want it to go out and do good in the world. And what we hope is by setting out this set of principles and guidance, we're going to create a more trusting, more transparent environment in which we can use that location data. So who we are, and that comes back to what I said before, you know, we really see this as an international collaboration. We don't want this to just be a benchmark thing. We don't want it to just be an ethical geo thing. We want this to be the global geospatial communities thing. So this needs to meet your needs. This needs to meet the needs of the geospatial practitioners in other countries. So that's a really important factor for us. I should say as well, this is really aimed at being practical. We don't want this to be just another talking shop of words that people kind of go, yes, yes, yes, yes, you know, that's great. But I don't know how to actually apply that in my day to day work. We want to make sure that this is actually something that's going to help you in your day to day work. And hopefully help you have conversations with policy makers, decision makers, as well as other data practitioners as well. So that bit is the sort of, you know, the wonderful headings at the top. This is the bit that's in development at the moment. So starting this week, we've got a series of workshops. And I know some of the names I've just seen pop up around some of those workshops that are happening over the next week or so. But we're starting to look at what the principles are. We're looking at things like, you know, what does location truth mean? You know, what does it mean to have a truthful location? Looking at things like precision versus privacy, looking at principles of using location data, you know, evidence for making good decisions and how you do that properly. And I've got, looking at values. So what are the values that actually underpin this? And you'll see words here, things like the value of transparency. And someone said to me recently, you know, it's not just about being transparent. It's about being actively transparent, you know, making, taking the initiative to ensure that people understand what you're doing. It's about communication. And this communication word is really interesting, because I see this when it comes to location data as not just being about the words we use, but about the maps we make. It's about making sure that we understand that any map we make is a communication tool. So ensuring that that map communicates the correct information so that people don't make bad decisions is a really important and underpinning value, I think, of the geospatial community. And looking at that trust relationship, you know, there's so many different points of trust when we're doing a project that uses geospatial data, particularly people's personal location data in here as well. A really interesting one that's kind of, I think, only recently added to our sort of suite of areas that we're looking for the framework is to look at this unintended harms and consequences list. Someone started using these terms about harms and unintended consequences the other day, and it was a really excellent way of explaining why you need to be careful. So it talked about things like, you know, biases that appear in algorithms. It talked about which you may not have intended. It might be that with the best of intentions you collected data and made a map, but actually it exposed someone's private data or it identified someone in a way that they shouldn't have been identified. So what we're trying to do there is create a really good list so that people who are practitioners trying to work in these spaces can read through and go, oh, actually I'm planning on trying to treating the data like that. I'd better be careful so that I don't have the same consequence. What can I do around that? The other thing is we're not about reinventing the wheel. So this framework and charter as such will not live in isolation. There's obviously an awful lot of good frameworks that are out there. So we're looking at things like the ODI's data ethics canvas. We're looking at things like the Charter of Trust, UN Privacy framework. And we're also looking at what the difference of regional and national related legislations are here as well. Because one of the things about being responsible is also knowing the legal framework in which you can actually do things within the country that you're into. The other thing, and I should say when I put this sort of a slide up as well, I should have really put draft across the whole of this too. So this is kind of the way we as a team have written up the location data life cycle. But I am entirely happy to be challenged on the structure of this, the terms we use in this. And that's part of the process that we're going. But I wanted to put this up because this is really the lens by which we're looking through all of those different elements here of principles and values and harms. We look at it through this lens. So kind of at each one of these points in the course of a location data life cycle, we're kind of saying, what's the questions I need to ask at that point? Who do I have to communicate and be transparent with? What are the consequences, the unintended consequences of harm that I have to take into consideration at each one of these different points while I'm dealing with that piece of location data? So this is kind of the workshop that we're doing is really looking at those different areas through this lens of what the location data life cycle is. And part of the reason that we picked this was that hopefully that helps, again, with practitioners to do their work because these would be all steps that you have to go through in all of the projects that you're working on as well. So where are we at at the moment? We are smack in the middle of writing workshops. So across June and July, we've got a series of workshops where we are looking at workshops where we are tackling the language. We're testing things that we've already written, we're looking for ideas, we're looking for better ways to express what we're saying. We want to know what those principles are. We want to know what your values are within this and the values that we need to code in these different places. And we're ensuring that that goes across the whole world. So there's workshops going everywhere. And what we're really interested to see is kind of regionally what's similar, what's different, and how we have to express that so that we ultimately get a framework and a charter that's going to meet everybody's needs. So our hope then is that we will finalise a set of wording around the charter and possibly even the framework as well for public release by the end of July. And then we're going to spend and we're basically going to set that free in the world. So all of you can get into that at that point, tear it apart, give us feedback, tell us how we should have done it better. And by the end of August, we'll collect all of that in, give it all a review and revise what we've done and hopefully finalise and launch a charter and framework that people can start using as of October this year. So it's a fairly short timeframe, but we're relatively confident in the lineup of workshops that we've got that we'll be able to get through and get it done by then. So why I'm talking today is I really want people to be involved with this. As I said, this is not just about me writing a charter and it's not just about them or the team in ethical geo. This really has to be something that gets feedback and input from the community at large. So I really want and today I'm totally happy to take those thoughts and ideas from people on the call after this presentation. But what I really want to know is for many of you that work with location data that are on this call at the moment, think about this question, you know, what would most help you to be a responsible and ethical location data practitioner? You know, what is the framework? What are the guidance? What are you missing at the moment that would help you do that? If you're really interested to be involved in a charter, I'd love you to be involved. So if they're getting contact, more than happy to put you on the invitation list for one of them and to bring you into input directly into it. If you're working on a project that relates to location data ethics, I'd love to hear from you. Again, we really want to reinvent the wheel. So we've already had a team from GeoNoVom in the Netherlands that we've gotten in touch with that is doing some brilliant work already looking at a framework. So there's a lot that you'll see in our workshops now that comes from them. But if you're working on something, please get in touch. We'd love to bring any of it into the program of work as well. This goes back to the the consequences and harms. The other thing that we're really, really looking for at the moment is case studies and two different types. So we're looking for case studies that is where you thought location data was handled really well, really ethically, really responsibly. And there was a great methodology that was used in the project to do that. Or case studies where through, you know, no intention necessarily of the project, there was pretty bad harm done on the other end of the project because of the way the location data was handled. And so those are the case studies we're really interested in to unpick and to say, well, what could the practitioner have done that would have prevented the harm at the other end of it? So you can email me. So email me at that address. There's also a form on our benchmark initiative website that you can go in and register your interest on as well. And lastly, I'll finish. If you are keen and interested to kind of see what we're talking about on the different panels that are on at the moment, we've got one this Friday. So that's looking, you know, at the pandemic, but looking at how the impact of data being collected at the moment might drive more data colonialism across the world. So it should be a pretty, pretty detailed discussion on Friday. But do go along and have a look and join if you're interested in knowing more. And with that, that's my presentation. So hopefully that's left enough time, Nick, for the questions. Wonderful. Yes. Thank you very much, Denise. Yes, we've got plenty of time for questions. And we've got a couple that have come in already, but please do send some more in. Firstly, from Jeremy Morley, is there any opportunity for some sort of kite mark for being responsible? And then with this applied to organizations or projects? And how would this be policed or revalidated? Yeah, that's a really good one. So I don't know how many people on the call have seen, but IEEE have recently put out an article that looked at what they call flood nutrition labels, almost. So the sort of things that you find on food that tells you about the energy and what have you. But the one that IEEE has put out kind of is more about looking at a sensor and looking at the implications and what it can collect and its precision and its capabilities. But they've actually put a column on there that actually says location. And at the moment, they haven't sort of filled that out as to what that would be. But I think, you know, looking at scorecards, looking at, you know, steps that you could sort of show. And I think that comes to that communication element that's really important. How do we find a good tool that's going to help us create that trust connection for the consumer and the public and us as the practitioners doing the work. So I think KiteMars is the one way of doing it, absolutely. And I think that, you know, certainly we've had conversations about in the long run, whether there's a way of doing kind of, you know, a business certification as such, you might be able to get your ethical star as such for the work that you're doing. So yeah, I think there's definitely a role in that. Great. Thank you. Yeah, we've also had another question from David Murray. Have you incorporated the GISCI Code of Ethics? The GISCI Code of Ethics. Where is that one from? I do not know. I have asked David that. I have to say, I don't know that one. David, can you email it to me? Yeah, he's from the USA, he says. I suspect actually the guys from ethical GO may have that on their list. But David, I'd really, if you can grab my email address, I'm happy to put that back up and you can more than please email that one through to me. So just in case we haven't got it. Great stuff. And also, he says it's the GIS Certification Institute. Yes, I think I have seen that one. Great stuff. Thank you, David. That was new to me as well. We also have another question, a kind of more general thing about how do we, if we do come up with some sort of kite mark or some sort of validation or whatever it might be, how do we help people understand this? Because we've got so many people who might want to have an opinion about this data. They're not all GIA professionals, by any means. And the kind of food labeling examples are poor to medium at best in terms of understandability in general. So how do we deal with that side things? I think it's a really hard one. Yeah, I know. It is a really good one actually. And I think that's one of the reasons why we're sort of stepping through this data lifecycle component the way we are. So one of the things that we ask the workshop participants sort of at each one of those levels is not just kind of what are the technical ethical questions you need to ask yourself at this point, but what are the communications questions I need to ask myself at each one of these points as well. And it could be that depending on which part you're at within that lifecycle, it might be a different type of comms you have to have. Like at the very end, when it's the finished product, it might be the nutrition label. But when you're at the collection point, actually, that might be more a kind of, you know, license typed, you know, series of points. But you're right in saying that the way we express that is what's going to be the secret to making this work. So looking at that simpler, more easy to understand language is what we have to find. But I think that the really important thing is not just finding it, but then all of us agreeing on it. And so the more we all use the same terms and the same way of expressing things, the easier it will start to be for citizens and the general public to understand what it is that we're doing as well. So I think that's part of the secret to what we need to do. Another question from Matt Brees. Will you be looking at including advice for when things go wrong and best practice for how to handle these situations? That makes me think of GDPR and that kind of thing. That's a great question. That is a really good question. I think, yeah, actually, I don't know that we had specifically thought about that, but perhaps it fits a bit under that unintended consequences and harms component of kind of once we've identified, you know, the common ones that people can get themselves into, maybe what we do then is actually say, so if you find yourself in this situation, here is how some people have handled that on the other end of it. And actually, that's a really good one. I quite like that. So I'll add that to our list. Yeah. And I have a couple of messages, you know, lots of people saying that there's lots more to learn here. And it's sometimes quite scary to get involved and ask things about this because we don't know much about it. And it's new for all of us. I get that impression. I think it is. And I think, you know what, it's one of the reasons why, whilst I use the word ethical, because that's where we started. I think it's the word ethical that scares the daylights out of everybody because trying to define that is really difficult. So I've switched a little bit more recently to talking a lot more about being responsible. And I think there's an inherent sort of sense that, you know, some of that is, you know, should be innate. You should kind of know what being responsible is. And I think being responsible at times is a bit easier to define than sometimes that sort of really esoteric concept of what ethical is. And to be fair, regional differences will play a part on what is seen as ethical and what's not. Yeah, great. And I think that's it in terms of questions. I think we've covered a reasonable selection there. Is there anything else you'd like to add before we close? No, no. The only thing I'll add in there is to kind of say to everybody, you know, if you are interested in the space, do get involved. It's not at a workshop level. What I would really say is when the charter kind of first draft comes out for public consultation, we need you. You know, we need everybody to kind of have a look at that, tell us whether we've missed the mark completely and that it's useless or whether there are bits of it that are useful and some bits that are not. But like I said, you know, we want to try and help that answer that question. So we want to kind of help unravel the mystery and make these easy for people to understand. We've had another one come in, Brett Karlock. I've been reading more about geospatial data ethics and its role in colonialism. Have you thought about these aspects in your guidelines? Yes. Well, join our panel session on Friday. What that's all about. Yes. So that is in there. I think when it comes to data colonialism, this is this will be one of those things where we have to be careful as to how we write these documents. At the end of the day, you don't want to get political in the language of these because you'll find then that they can't be used in certain countries around the world because the way expressing. So it's not that we don't want to tackle it. I think it's a, we just need to be careful how we express some things around that. Yeah. And it would be really great to see the kind of first draft when it comes out and to see the comments on that as well. Because it's, writing this thing from scratch is one thing, but being able to read a draft and make comments is a lot easier. So I hope you get some good input from that. Yeah. Well, I mean, I will say already, thanks to many, many people that have already helped us put input into these along the way and to those that have agreed to join our initial set of workshops. Because with each person we talk to, you know, you get a new insight and you get a new addition to that. So it's been a really great experience from that. I certainly learned a lot in the last six months by helping with all of this.
 Thanks, Nick. Just for those of you who don't know me, which I know many of you probably  were last year's Fossbore G UK, where I spoke a bit about ethics and I talked a bit about  diversity as well at that one. But my name's Denise McKenzie. I'm one of the co-directors  of the thing called the Benchmark Initiative out of Geovation, which is what I'll be talking  about today. Also in the broader community, I'm the chair of the AGI and also sit on the  steering committee for the Women and Geospatial Group as well. So today I want to talk to you  a bit about a thing called the Locust Charter and also the Benchmark Initiative.  I can get my PowerPoints work. Brilliant. Okay, so to give you a little bit of background then,  Benchmark Initiative started last year around October. It's an initiative that is run through  Geovation, so obviously Ordnance Survey's Accelerator arrangement in London, but is funded out of the  immediate network and from a section of immediate that's now become called the Place Fund. Part of  that also is that immediate funded a complimentary piece of work in the United States called Ethical  Geo, which had a slightly different focus to Benchmark, but is very, very complimentary to what  it is that we're doing as well. So in essence, what Benchmark is all about is actually initially a  thought leadership program. And it was a thought leadership program really focused on looking at  that ethical application of location data. So the objectives that we were really looking at trying to  do was, I guess, initially to start to help people better understand what the arena of Geospatial  Data Ethics is all about. But what Benchmark was specifically asked to do is sort of not get bogged  in just research, but to look at real world tools and applications that we can actually use now.  It was also about looking at addressing the risks and opportunities. We really were told to generate  international discussions, so part of that is why I'm talking to you all today. And importantly,  I really liked that we were asked to make a positive impact in the global community. So we,  they didn't want this to just sort of be yet another talking shop exercise. They wanted something  that was going to go out and help change things. So what's been involved so far? We did have a  face-to-face summit series, which is obviously now virtual, like everything else. We put a call  out for an entrepreneur program, and we've got four entrepreneurs working with us at the moment.  And it's a real mixed bag of things that we're doing. We're looking at tools for understanding  ethical implications of using things like development data. We're looking at methods of  anonymisation, for transport data. We're looking at a web game, and the Location Data Ethics web  game is really trying to look at that. How do we educate people? How do we get people to understand  what the implications of this all is? And the last one that we've got starting really soon is,  obviously, a little bit related to what's happened recently as regards COVID. We've got  a new entrepreneur starting with us that's beginning to look at ethical methods for the tracing apps  as well. But the one I want to talk to you today about has been a recent addition in the last  couple of months, and that's the Locust Charter. So I should say this is not just a benchmark  initiative. One of the things about the Locust Charter is that this is a partnership between  us and that complementary group, Ethical Geo over in the United States. And I think more broadly,  what we view it as between our two groups is not just ours, but actually the Geospatial  Communities Charter. So whilst we're getting the conversation going and we're helping during the  writing, actually what we really hope is that this will be a charter for everybody to use.  So why are we doing it? This is really kind of, I guess, a list of things that I've learnt  out of the process of being involved in benchmark. Getting to grips with what Ethical Location is  is really hard for a lot of people to understand. What I have experienced along the way in talking  to lots of people though is that really most practitioners, and I'm sure many of you that  are on the call right now, actually really want to do the right thing. No one actively wants to go  out and be unethical, really. I mean, I'm sure there's many bad people out there, but most of  the practitioners that we deal with really are interested in doing the right thing. But there's  just not enough practical guidance on what that is and how to go about doing that. There does  seem to be a number of emerging guides about data generally, but none that are kind of focused on  the nuances, if you like, of our geospatial data. And I think if you look across what's happened in  the last three months, we've gone from a situation where, yeah, people are a bit concerned about  location privacy, but still didn't really understand much of it to a situation where tracing apps are  on the front page of the Guardian. We've got major inquiries happening in the United States about  geofencing being used in law enforcement around the protests that are happening at the moment.  And more and more and more, there's questions about exposure of privacy and people's personal  private location data as well. So in reading all of that amazing suite of articles, and I will say  that myself and my co-director, Ben, struggle, I think, at times to keep up with everything that  keeps appearing in the media at the moment on this. But what we've really learned is that there is a  huge need at the moment for a better language for us to communicate what we're doing with location  data and how we're doing the right thing. So the Locust Charter, and you're seeing there a grayed  out section there are called and framework, because what's starting to emerge is that what we're  doing is probably a lot bigger than just a charter. But I'll leave that in gray because it's really  the kind of new addition part of this. But it's about trying to set out, if you like, an international  set of principles and guidance for that responsible practice. And the reason we're doing that is that  we don't want location data to be stifled. At the end of the day, we actually want it to go out  and do good in the world. And what we hope is by setting out this set of principles and guidance,  we're going to create a more trusting, more transparent environment in which we can use  that location data. So who we are, and that comes back to what I said before, you know, we really  see this as an international collaboration. We don't want this to just be a benchmark thing.  We don't want it to just be an ethical geo thing. We want this to be the global geospatial communities  thing. So this needs to meet your needs. This needs to meet the needs of the geospatial practitioners  in other countries. So that's a really important factor for us. I should say as well, this is  really aimed at being practical. We don't want this to be just another talking shop of words that  people kind of go, yes, yes, yes, yes, you know, that's great. But I don't know how to actually  apply that in my day to day work. We want to make sure that this is actually something that's going  to help you in your day to day work. And hopefully help you have conversations with policy makers,  decision makers, as well as other data practitioners as well. So that bit is the sort of, you know,  the wonderful headings at the top. This is the bit that's in development at the moment.  So starting this week, we've got a series of workshops. And I know some of the names I've  just seen pop up around some of those workshops that are happening over the next week or so.  But we're starting to look at what the principles are. We're looking at things like, you know,  what does location truth mean? You know, what does it mean to have a truthful location? Looking at  things like precision versus privacy, looking at principles of using location data, you know,  evidence for making good decisions and how you do that properly. And I've got,  looking at values. So what are the values that actually underpin this? And you'll see  words here, things like the value of transparency. And someone said to me recently, you know, it's  not just about being transparent. It's about being actively transparent, you know, making,  taking the initiative to ensure that people understand what you're doing.  It's about communication. And this communication word is really interesting, because I see this  when it comes to location data as not just being about the words we use, but about the maps we make.  It's about making sure that we understand that any map we make is a communication tool. So  ensuring that that map communicates the correct information so that people don't make bad decisions  is a really important and underpinning value, I think, of the geospatial community. And looking  at that trust relationship, you know, there's so many different points of trust when we're  doing a project that uses geospatial data, particularly people's personal location data  in here as well. A really interesting one that's kind of, I think, only recently added to our sort  of suite of areas that we're looking for the framework is to look at this unintended harms  and consequences list. Someone started using these terms about harms and unintended consequences  the other day, and it was a really excellent way of explaining why you need to be careful.  So it talked about things like, you know, biases that appear in algorithms. It talked about which  you may not have intended. It might be that with the best of intentions you collected data and made  a map, but actually it exposed someone's private data or it identified someone in a way that they  shouldn't have been identified. So what we're trying to do there is create a really good list so that  people who are practitioners trying to work in these spaces can read through and go, oh, actually  I'm planning on trying to treating the data like that. I'd better be careful so that I don't have the  same consequence. What can I do around that? The other thing is we're not about reinventing the  wheel. So this framework and charter as such will not live in isolation. There's obviously an awful  lot of good frameworks that are out there. So we're looking at things like the ODI's data ethics  canvas. We're looking at things like the Charter of Trust, UN Privacy framework. And we're also  looking at what the difference of regional and national related legislations are here as well.  Because one of the things about being responsible is also knowing the legal framework in which you  can actually do things within the country that you're into. The other thing, and I should say when I  put this sort of a slide up as well, I should have really put draft across the whole of this too. So  this is kind of the way we as a team have written up the location data life cycle. But I am entirely  happy to be challenged on the structure of this, the terms we use in this. And that's part of the  process that we're going. But I wanted to put this up because this is really the lens by which we're  looking through all of those different elements here of principles and values and harms. We look  at it through this lens. So kind of at each one of these points in the course of a location data  life cycle, we're kind of saying, what's the questions I need to ask at that point? Who do I  have to communicate and be transparent with? What are the consequences, the unintended consequences  of harm that I have to take into consideration at each one of these different points while I'm  dealing with that piece of location data? So this is kind of the workshop that we're doing is really  looking at those different areas through this lens of what the location data life cycle is. And part  of the reason that we picked this was that hopefully that helps, again, with practitioners to do their  work because these would be all steps that you have to go through in all of the projects that you're  working on as well. So where are we at at the moment? We are smack in the middle of writing  workshops. So across June and July, we've got a series of workshops where we are looking at  workshops where we are tackling the language. We're testing things that we've already written,  we're looking for ideas, we're looking for better ways to express what we're saying.  We want to know what those principles are. We want to know what your values are within this  and the values that we need to code in these different places. And we're ensuring that that  goes across the whole world. So there's workshops going everywhere. And what we're really interested  to see is kind of regionally what's similar, what's different, and how we have to express that so  that we ultimately get a framework and a charter that's going to meet everybody's needs. So our  hope then is that we will finalise a set of wording around the charter and possibly even the framework  as well for public release by the end of July. And then we're going to spend and we're basically  going to set that free in the world. So all of you can get into that at that point, tear it apart,  give us feedback, tell us how we should have done it better. And by the end of August, we'll collect  all of that in, give it all a review and revise what we've done and hopefully finalise and launch  a charter and framework that people can start using as of October this year. So it's a fairly  short timeframe, but we're relatively confident in the lineup of workshops that we've got that we'll  be able to get through and get it done by then. So why I'm talking today is I really want people  to be involved with this. As I said, this is not just about me writing a charter and it's not just  about them or the team in ethical geo. This really has to be something that gets feedback and input  from the community at large. So I really want and today I'm totally happy to take those thoughts  and ideas from people on the call after this presentation. But what I really want to know is  for many of you that work with location data that are on this call at the moment, think about this  question, you know, what would most help you to be a responsible and ethical location data practitioner?  You know, what is the framework? What are the guidance? What are you missing at the moment  that would help you do that? If you're really interested to be involved in a charter, I'd  love you to be involved. So if they're getting contact, more than happy to put you on the invitation  list for one of them and to bring you into input directly into it. If you're working on a project  that relates to location data ethics, I'd love to hear from you. Again, we really want to reinvent  the wheel. So we've already had a team from GeoNoVom in the Netherlands that we've gotten in touch with  that is doing some brilliant work already looking at a framework. So there's a lot that you'll see  in our workshops now that comes from them. But if you're working on something, please get in touch.  We'd love to bring any of it into the program of work as well. This goes back to the the  consequences and harms. The other thing that we're really, really looking for at the moment is case  studies and two different types. So we're looking for case studies that is where you thought location  data was handled really well, really ethically, really responsibly. And there was a great methodology  that was used in the project to do that. Or case studies where through, you know,  no intention necessarily of the project, there was pretty bad harm done on the other end of the  project because of the way the location data was handled. And so those are the case studies we're  really interested in to unpick and to say, well, what could the practitioner have done  that would have prevented the harm at the other end of it? So you can email me. So email me at  that address. There's also a form on our benchmark initiative website that you can go in and register  your interest on as well. And lastly, I'll finish. If you are keen and interested to kind of see what  we're talking about on the different panels that are on at the moment, we've got one this Friday.  So that's looking, you know, at the pandemic, but looking at how the impact of data being  collected at the moment might drive more data colonialism across the world. So it should be a  pretty, pretty detailed discussion on Friday. But do go along and have a look and join if  you're interested in knowing more. And with that, that's my presentation. So hopefully that's left  enough time, Nick, for the questions. Wonderful. Yes. Thank you very much, Denise. Yes, we've got  plenty of time for questions. And we've got a couple that have come in already, but please do send  some more in. Firstly, from Jeremy Morley, is there any opportunity for some sort of kite mark  for being responsible? And then with this applied to organizations or projects? And how would this  be policed or revalidated? Yeah, that's a really good one. So I don't know how many people on the  call have seen, but IEEE have recently put out an article that looked at what they call  flood nutrition labels, almost. So the sort of things that you find on food that tells you  about the energy and what have you. But the one that IEEE has put out kind of is more about  looking at a sensor and looking at the implications and what it can collect and its precision and  its capabilities. But they've actually put a column on there that actually says location. And at  the moment, they haven't sort of filled that out as to what that would be. But I think, you know,  looking at scorecards, looking at, you know, steps that you could sort of show. And I think that  comes to that communication element that's really important. How do we find a good tool  that's going to help us create that trust connection for the consumer and the public and us  as the practitioners doing the work. So I think KiteMars is the one way of doing it, absolutely.  And I think that, you know, certainly we've had conversations about in the long run, whether  there's a way of doing kind of, you know, a business certification as such, you might be able  to get your ethical star as such for the work that you're doing. So yeah, I think there's definitely  a role in that. Great. Thank you. Yeah, we've also had another question from David Murray.  Have you incorporated the GISCI Code of Ethics?  The GISCI Code of Ethics. Where is that one from?  I do not know. I have asked David that.  I have to say, I don't know that one. David, can you email it to me?  Yeah, he's from the USA, he says.  I suspect actually the guys from ethical GO may have that on their list. But David, I'd really,  if you can grab my email address, I'm happy to put that back up and you can more than please  email that one through to me. So just in case we haven't got it.  Great stuff. And also, he says it's the GIS Certification Institute.  Yes, I think I have seen that one.  Great stuff. Thank you, David. That was new to me as well.  We also have another question, a kind of more general thing about how do we, if we do come up  with some sort of kite mark or some sort of validation or whatever it might be, how do we  help people understand this? Because we've got so many people who might want to have an opinion  about this data. They're not all GIA professionals, by any means. And the kind of food labeling  examples are poor to medium at best in terms of understandability in general. So how do we deal  with that side things? I think it's a really hard one. Yeah, I know.  It is a really good one actually. And I think that's one of the reasons why we're sort of stepping  through this data lifecycle component the way we are. So one of the things that we ask the  workshop participants sort of at each one of those levels is not just kind of what are the  technical ethical questions you need to ask yourself at this point, but what are the communications  questions I need to ask myself at each one of these points as well. And it could be that  depending on which part you're at within that lifecycle, it might be a different type of comms  you have to have. Like at the very end, when it's the finished product, it might be the nutrition  label. But when you're at the collection point, actually, that might be more a kind of, you know,  license typed, you know, series of points. But you're right in saying that the way we  express that is what's going to be the secret to making this work. So looking at that simpler,  more easy to understand language is what we have to find. But I think that the really  important thing is not just finding it, but then all of us agreeing on it. And so the more we all  use the same terms and the same way of expressing things, the easier it will start to be for citizens  and the general public to understand what it is that we're doing as well. So I think that's part  of the secret to what we need to do. Another question from Matt Brees. Will you be looking at  including advice for when things go wrong and best practice for how to handle these situations?  That makes me think of GDPR and that kind of thing. That's a great question.  That is a really good question. I think, yeah, actually, I don't know that we had specifically  thought about that, but perhaps it fits a bit under that unintended consequences and harms  component of kind of once we've identified, you know, the common ones that people can get themselves  into, maybe what we do then is actually say, so if you find yourself in this situation,  here is how some people have handled that on the other end of it. And actually,  that's a really good one. I quite like that. So I'll add that to our list.  Yeah. And I have a couple of messages, you know, lots of people saying that there's lots more to  learn here. And it's sometimes quite scary to get involved and ask things about this because we  don't know much about it. And it's new for all of us. I get that impression.  I think it is. And I think, you know what, it's one of the reasons why,  whilst I use the word ethical, because that's where we started. I think it's the word ethical  that scares the daylights out of everybody because trying to define that is really difficult.  So I've switched a little bit more recently to talking a lot more about being responsible.  And I think there's an inherent sort of sense that, you know, some of that is,  you know, should be innate. You should kind of know what being responsible is. And I think  being responsible at times is a bit easier to define than sometimes that sort of really  esoteric concept of what ethical is. And to be fair, regional differences will play a part on what  is seen as ethical and what's not.  Yeah, great. And I think that's it in terms of questions. I think we've covered a reasonable  selection there. Is there anything else you'd like to add before we close?  No, no. The only thing I'll add in there is to kind of say to everybody, you know,  if you are interested in the space, do get involved. It's not at a workshop level.  What I would really say is when the charter kind of first draft comes out for public  consultation, we need you. You know, we need everybody to kind of have a look at that,  tell us whether we've missed the mark completely and that it's useless or whether there are  bits of it that are useful and some bits that are not. But like I said, you know, we want to try  and help that answer that question. So we want to kind of help unravel the mystery and make  these easy for people to understand. We've had another one come in, Brett Karlock. I've been  reading more about geospatial data ethics and its role in colonialism. Have you thought about  these aspects in your guidelines? Yes. Well, join our panel session on Friday.  What that's all about. Yes. So that is in there. I think when it comes to data colonialism, this  is this will be one of those things where we have to be careful as to how we write these documents.  At the end of the day, you don't want to get political in the language of these because  you'll find then that they can't be used in certain countries around the world because  the way expressing. So it's not that we don't want to tackle it. I think it's a, we just need to be  careful how we express some things around that. Yeah. And it would be really great to see the  kind of first draft when it comes out and to see the comments on that as well. Because it's,  writing this thing from scratch is one thing, but being able to read a draft and make comments  is a lot easier. So I hope you get some good input from that. Yeah. Well, I mean, I will say  already, thanks to many, many people that have already helped us put input into these along the  way and to those that have agreed to join our initial set of workshops. Because with each person  we talk to, you know, you get a new insight and you get a new addition to that. So it's been a  really great experience from that. I certainly learned a lot in the last six months by helping with all of this.
FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_0_107.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_108_1079.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_1080_1643.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_1644_2279.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_2280_3479.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_3480_4655.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_4656_5627.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_5628_8447.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_8448_16319.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_16320_17567.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_17568_19763.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_19764_20123.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_20124_21887.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_21888_24167.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_24168_24347.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_24348_25079.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_25080_25679.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_25680_26423.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_26424_26843.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_26844_26975.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_26976_27035.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_27036_27095.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_27096_27635.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_27636_27695.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_27696_29327.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_29328_29531.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_29532_31619.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_31620_31823.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_31824_32231.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_32232_33371.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_33372_36191.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_36192_36755.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_36756_36899.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_36900_36983.png FOSS4GUKOnline_2020_Sentinel_McKenzie_n02i0fhKzyo_36984_37016.png