Analysts are increasingly alarmed about China's activities, such as technology exports, that support the promotion of its governance model worldwide. Among these voices, this article maps the implementation of Safe and Smart City (SSC) projects in Bishkek and Kyrgyzstan. The objective is to determine the extent to which SSC projects – with a primary focus on their surveillance camera networks – may strengthen the Kyrgyz government's surveillance capabilities and pose threats (understood as further limitations on individual freedoms) to citizens. The paper also examines whether SSC projects should be seen as China's economic projects and whether Beijing might use the construction of surveillance infrastructure in Kyrgyzstan to promote its model of digital authoritarianism. The article's argument is threefold. First, Safe City (and Safe Country) may support the surveillance capabilities of the Kyrgyz authorities, but it is not at their core. Second, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that China's involvement in SSC implementation in Kyrgyzstan is direct or substantial; it is softer and harder to map. Third, in their attempts to discover technology-related threats in non-liberal-democratic contexts, scholars could shift their focus from projects to institutions. Instead of examining particular projects (e.g., Smart City), scrutiny of various initiatives involving surveillance equipment developed by one state organ might be more informative. Such analyses could enable more accurate examinations of the threats inherent in tech-related solutions involving international cooperation and prompt reflection on the extent to which new technological solutions might support state control over citizens or enhance human flourishing in various political contexts.
In contemporary health policy, digitalization is frequently imagined as a tool towards more effective and efficient governance. This article presents the case of the digitalization of the maternal and child health program in Austria; specifically, the recent introduction of an electronic maternal and child health record. Our study offers insights into what we label “data hesitancy” and the shape that digital health governance can take in such a context. We ask, how did digitalization emerge as a solution to the problem of maternal and child health, considering longstanding hesitancy towards digital health governance in Austria? We draw on the “What's the problem represented to be?” approach to trace a series of (re)problematizations of maternal and child health across time. Our research is based on an analysis of press releases ( n = 162) and policy documents on the topic of maternal and child health from 1997 to 2023. Here, we examine how different actors problematized maternal and child health and how they came to jointly represent it as a problem that requires the collection, storage, and use of data. We show that digitalization helped to depoliticize contentious issues by foregrounding the technological infrastructures underpinning policy programs and backgrounding disagreements concerning their scope.
In The Dualism of Human Nature and Its Social Conditions , Durkheim differentiates the body and the soul as two substantially different and conflictual parts of the human being. Durkheim argues that the two opposite sides together produce the individual being who needs both body and soul, and their cooperation. Society has a similar existence produced by the antagonism of its body and its soul. Following Durkheim, I understand surveillance as the administration of this complicated duality of society. Surveillance society is a society where its soul is settled at a different level through re-embodiment. Datafied society is a higher form of this re-embodiment and tends to resolve the Durkheimian duality. Through this resolution, it threatens the very existence of society. This paper examines this tendency in datafication processes. The brief analysis also demonstrates the possible ways human flourishing may operate owing to the ambivalence of datafication. I argue that ambivalence is the very condition of (human) flourishing.
Background Government-funded data platforms worldwide link diverse datasets for secondary research. Their functioning relies on public trust, which requires understanding public perspectives on data governance and aligning policies where possible. This study explores public perspectives on three key aspects of data governance in Singapore: data access methods, researcher credibility assessment and public involvement models. Methods We conducted four focus group discussions ( n = 38) with Singapore citizens and permanent residents from the Health Opinion Panel Singapore (HOPS) panel. Discussions explored preferences regarding data visiting versus data sharing, characteristics of reputable researchers and models for incorporating public input into governance. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Our analysis identified four key themes. First, participants preferred governance controls over technical protections, valuing oversight regardless of access method. Second, trustworthiness rather than reputation was prioritized, with personal integrity and research purpose considered more important than institutional affiliation. Third, participants preferred balanced approaches to public involvement incorporating diverse perspectives while maintaining efficiency. Finally, participants expressed concerns about societal harms beyond individual privacy, including commercial exploitation, community stigmatization and impacts on vulnerable populations. Conclusions Our findings suggest that data governance should prioritize transparency, meaningful public involvement and comprehensive assessment of trustworthiness to maintain public trust and social license to operate. Technical approaches like data visiting must be complemented by robust governance frameworks incorporating public values and addressing long-term societal impacts. As health data platforms evolve globally, incorporating diverse public perspectives in governance can enhance legitimacy, strengthen accountability and ensure research contributes to public benefit.
This commentary reflects on some ethical challenges involved in research exploring affectivity, infertility, and image sharing in Facebook groups made up of women from Latin American cities who use reproductive technologies. From a feminist perspective, the author reflects on the tensions between academic observation and respect for the intimate experiences shared in these digital sociabilities. She considers how emotions, bodies, things, and images circulate in contexts marked by liminality and vulnerability, which demands a sensitive and situated ethical stance. The autoethnographic approach allows for the recognition of the researcher's involvement in the field, questioning traditional objectivity and highlighting the need for an ethic of care and reciprocity.
