Digital Watch newsletter - Issue 30 - April 2018

The UNCTAD E-Commerce Week has grown in recent years to become a key opportunity for information-sharing, agenda-setting, and networking. This yearly event gathers a diverse audience of governments, international organisations, business representatives, academics, and civil society. In 2018, the presence of governments was strengthened by the second meeting of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts on E-commerce and the Digital Economy taking place in parallel to the E-commerce Week.

E-commerce is a fast-growing field. Several initiatives are dedicated to collecting accurate information that will contribute to policy-making in this area, such as data on cross-border flows, elements that could boost consumer trust, the products that sell more easily in certain regions, and the concrete gaps that countries need to fill when it comes to developing their e-commerce readiness strategies. Some of the enabling conditions for e-commerce include the need to strengthen the digital aspects of the Trade Facilitation strategy, to overcome cross-border barriers to digital payments, and the adoption of concrete measures to support small and medium enterprises (SMEs), while fostering trust in cross-border trade.

The overarching theme of the e-commerce week was ‘Development dimensions of digital platforms’, therefore several sessions were dedicated to discussing the economic and social impact of online platforms. Some of them addressed the interaction between SMEs and platforms, while others focused on the platform-centred job market and the standards that need to be observed for fair work conditions to be achieved. The effects that a platform-based economy could have on future developments were discussed in a high-level ministerial dialogue.

From 18 to 20 April, governments got together at the second session of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts on E-commerce and the Digital Economy. This meeting provided an opportunity for knowledge-sharing among governments, academics, and business representatives. Discussions covered issues such as the revenue model of online platforms and the precarious work conditions of the labour force joining the online job market. This new reality requires the updating of policies relating to competition, industrial, trade, and privacy, for example.

The meeting also tackled barriers to accessing global e-commerce and possible ways to overcome them, the importance of public-private partnerships, the need for breaking down barriers to cross-border trade, and the elimination of operational constraints, and detailed best practices for e-commerce adoption in the developing world. One of the concrete proposals advanced at the meeting was the creation of a working group focused on helping developing nations measure domestic e-commerce indicators and incorporating global perspectives.

Throughout the week, it became clear that e-commerce is a multidimensional issue, which cannot be successfully tackled without the collaboration between public and private sectors. The role of business in protecting online consumers was discussed, as well as the need to introduce consumers’ interests and concerns in trade negotiations, especially in a context in which users’ data becomes an increasingly valuable asset.

The challenges that unhindered data flows and online platforms could pose to development were also highlighted. If data is the new oil, then it should not be given away for free by developing countries to large foreign corporations. In addition, the potentially negative consequences of provisions aiming to forbid the mandatory disclosure of software source-codes – on fields as varied as national security, public safety, and food production – were analysed.

Emerging technologies and approaches could play an important role in supporting e-commerce. Some examples can be found in the use of blockchain to enhance trade facilitation, and in the way that e-Residency, Estonia has enabled the creation of a digital identity provided by the government of Estonia,  granting the ability to use the country's digital platform to access the European market.

Several sessions tackled the need to strengthen capacity building efforts, in general, and to improve the skills necessary to boost entrepreneurship in Africa, more specifically.Concrete examples of capacity development initiatives[link] were shared, such as a course on e-commerce that has been jointly offered by DiploFoundation, CUTS International Geneva, the International Trade Centre, UNCTAD, and the GIP.

Read our reports from most digital policy sessions held during UNCTAD’s E-Commerce Week.

Fully autonomous weapons might not yet exist, but their possible development and use is seen with concern by states party to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Since November 2017, a Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) has been exploring the potential implications of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and the need for policy options to possibly govern them. The group met this month in Geneva; we summarise the main issues.

Addressing the challenges of LAWS

Building on their work from November 2017, the GGE convened to address the humanitarian and security concerns that may arise with the potential development of LAWS.

Some states raised concerns that autonomous weapons could lead to an international arms race, fundamentally change the nature of warfare, and generate dangerous asymmetries between states. They also pointed to the risk of LAWS being acquired by non-state actors and terrorist groups.

At the technical level, there are risks related to errors in the machines and bias in the algorithms, and the possibility that they could be hacked and interfered with. There is also the issue of ethics in allowing machines – which do not have ethical reasoning or emotion – to make a decision on taking the life of a human being. From a legal point of view, the main question is whether LAWS could comply with international humanitarian and human law.

Searching for a definition

Deciding on whether and how to define LAWS remained one of the most important points of debate. While some states prefered to keep the debate flexible, others emphasised the need for a definition to be able to move towards policy options.

The approach that seemed to have gathered the most support is to describe LAWS as weapons systems with autonomy in their critical functions, i.e., selecting and attacking targets without human intervention. But the discussion was not finalised, as some underlined the need for a better understanding of the term ‘critical functions’, while others expressed concern over the use of the term ‘lethal’, noting that weapons can inflict excessive harm even if they are not intended to be lethal.

Meaningful human control and human accountability

There was general agreement that meaningful human control is essential in the development and use of LAWS. What remained difficult was to define concepts such as ‘control’, ‘meaningful’, and ‘sufficient’.

Another issue discussed was the need for accountability and human responsibility to be present throughout the lifecycle of an autonomous weapon, from development, to testing and use. On the question of who bears the ultimate responsibility if the weapons system is misused or if it malfunctions, most seemed to agree that this responsibility should remain with the commander who decides to launch the system.

Exploring policy options

Are international laws comprehensive enough to address the risks associated with LAWS? If not, do we need to improve the implementation of current laws, or create new instruments?

Some argued that new regulation is not needed. The concerns around LAWS and their compliance with humanitarian law could be addressed through strengthening Article 36 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions – which should ensure that no unlawful weapon will be developed and used.

In addition, there was increasing momentum for a political declaration to affirm that states share the conviction that humans should continue to make the ultimate decision on the use of lethal force and exercise sufficient control over LAWS.

A growing number of states voiced their support for a legally binding instrument prohibiting the development and use of LAWS, and a moratorium on their current development and use, based on the ethical, legal, military, and technological risks they pose to humanity.

What next?

As reflected in the Chair’s summary, this session of the GGE managed to further explore the concept of LAWS and promote common understanding, especially on the notion of meaningful human control. The group's next meeting in August 2018 will determine whether this common understanding will be able to lead to concrete recommendations.

Meanwhile, it is likely that the potential implications of automation and AI for warfare and international security will generate more debate in the public space. This month, for example, The Economist dedicated one article in its most recent print edition to autonomous weapons, by reviewing Paul Scharre’s book Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War. While Rand Corporation published a paper on How might artificial intelligence affect the risk of nuclear war.

Read the full briefing paper on the outcomes of the April meeting of the GGE.

As our daily life gets more and more digitalised, the health space increasingly relies on technology. ICTs are used to bring more efficiency through applications, such as electronic medical records and electronic prescribing, while telehealth and telemedicine allow remote access to healthcare services.

Mobile health applications and wearable devices are developed to monitor, detect, and prevent health issues (by both patients and doctors). 3D printing technology is used in prosthetics, facilitating the development of highly personalised artificial limbs. And robotics and AI have more and more applications in the medical field, from medical robots to algorithms that can improve medical diagnosis and treatment.

But these advancements inevitably carry several implications for digital policy, in areas such as security of devices, misuse of personal data, and inequalities in accessing to digital health solutions.

Read about the technological developments and policy implications of digital health on our dedicated space.