EUR PEAN H RIZONS EUROPEAN HORIZONS YOUTH SUMMIT ON THE TRANSATLANTIC DIGITAL ECONOMY 2016
Bruges, Belgium | November 20–22, 2016 | College of Europe
1 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org PHOTO CREDIT: Margret Morris TABLE OF CONTENTS
3 Opening Letter
7 How DEYS Started
8 Statistics
10 Our Sponsors
11 Testimonials
15 European Horizons
16 Directory
19 The Conference: Policy Papers and Workshop Reviews
20 Closing Remarks
25 Policy Papers
26 TRANSATLANTIC DATA PROTECTION WORKSHOP
• Passenger Name Record Data and Mass Surveillance
• Reconciling Differing Approaches to Privacy
• The EU-US Privacy Shield Agreement
43 INVESTING IN EMERGING NEW TECHNOLOGIES WORKSHOP
• Social Entrepreneurship
• Regulation EUR PEAN H RIZONS
54 TOWARDS A TRANSATLANTIC SINGLE DIGITAL MARKET WORKSHOP
• Overcoming Political Blockage to a TSDM
• Cohesion in User and Contributor Protections for User Driven Digital Platforms Towards a Transatlantic Digital Single Market
• Simulation and Recap and Lessons
• How to Build a Transatlantic Cyber Security Union as a Prelude to a Transatlantic Single Digital Market (TSDM)
• The Redistributive Consequences of a TSDM to increase the Competitiveness of European SMEs
• Protecting Net Neutrality in the Transatlantic Digital Market (TSDM)
76 JOB CREATION IN TIMES OF INDUSTRY DISRUPTION WORKSHOP
• Achieving Gender Equity in the Digital Economy of the Future
• The Future of Health Care & Job Creation Development in the European Union
• Designing the Education System for the Digital Economy of the Future
• A European Campaign Un-Black-Boxing Data Valuation Processes
2 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
OPENING REMARKS
Dear all,
As we begin 2017, it is with great pleasure that Melina and I reflect on what was truly a constructive and insightful Youth Summit on the Transatlantic Digital Economy (DEYS) at the College of Europe. The purpose of DEYS was to elaborate a set of policy options that current young leaders deem essential for advancing the transatlantic digital agenda. To that end, 75 participants from 42 universities presented the policy papers they had been working on for several weeks prior to the summit, receiving guidance from industry insiders, academics and policy-makers. The output, which you will find in this report, is now ready to continue being refined and perfected over the next year.
In line with European Horizons’ broader goal, DEYS inspired our group of highly talented participants to strive for the continued and strengthened cooperation between Europe and the United States, a goal that is more important than ever in our recent history. We are convinced that the youth of Europe and America is prepared to seize this changing environment and shape its course across the Atlantic in the years to come. We are engaged citizens. We want to design our future.
For European Horizons, the Youth Summit on the Transatlantic Digital Economy holds particular significance as the first event held on the European continent. But the journey is not over. We are working hard towards expand- ing our network. In addition to the 40+ chapters we have in North America, we opened 8 chapters in Europe and are aiming to have a further 15 by the end of 2017. This ever growing institution is the perfect niche to further the 2017 European Horizons Chapter Roadmap for the Transatlantic Digital Economy.
We would like to kindly thank our partners for their support throughout the organization of the Youth Summit on the Transatlantic Digital Economy: Google, Generali, ETNO, Foundation Hippocrene and Groupe des Belles.
3 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Additionally, we would like to extend our gratitude to our host university, College of Europe, for sharing its facilities and personnel for European Horizons’ cause.
In the following pages you will find a more detailed account ofDEYS , includ- ing images testimonials from participants and professionals and the final policy papers.
All the best, Melina & Elias
PHOTO CREDIT Elin Waldenström
4 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PHOTO CREDITS
TOP: Elin Waldenström
MIDDLE, LEFT TO RIGHT: Margret Morris
RIGHT: Elin Waldenström
5 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PHOTO CREDITS
LEFT: Elin Waldenström
MIDDLE, LEFT TO RIGHT: Margret Morris
BOTTOM: Elin Waldenström
6 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
HOW IT STARTED
Conceived in 2015, DEYS was the first event that European Horizons orga- nized on European soil. Following our first annual Fall Policy Convention that same year, we established the principles of European Horizons, two of which are greater European integration and deeper transatlantic relations. These principles, in addition to the newly established innovation pillar of European Horizons which aims to support entrepreneurship projects that have a direct social impact in Europe, gave birth to the first Youth Summit on the Transatlantic Digital Economy.
Using the pre-existing European Horizons network of Chapters and personal connections, the application for DEYS was distributed throughout American and European Universities. DEYS posed an additional challenge as we sought to target those that were interested in both Europe and the Digital Economy. To that end, we contacted not only departments of Political Science and European Studies, but also those of Technology and Computer Science.
Admission to the Summit was highly competitive. We selected highly knowl- edgeable students, both graduate and undergraduate, and aimed to keep a balance between those from American and European institutions. Thanks to our generous sponsors, travel to DEYS was heavily subsidized, with food and accommodation covered completely.
DEYS occurred between the European Leadership Day at the Jean Monnet House in Paris and the EPRS day in Brussels. Participants arrived in Bruges on Sunday 20th of November to elaborate a set of policy options that current young leaders deem essential for advancing the transatlantic digital agenda. Over the course of the following two days the Summit took place at the College of Europe campus where participants gathered with industry professionals, politicians and academics to refine their policy papers. We bid farewell to the participants on the evening of Tuesday 22nd of November, with many continuing on with the European Horizons team to the EPRS day in Brussels.
7 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
STATISTICS
35 UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS (48.57%) 75 32 GRADUATE STUDENTS (48.86%) 6 PHD STUDENTS (8.57%)
TOTAL PARTICIPANTS
38 FEMALE PARTICIPANTS 1:1 (50.67%) 3:1 MALE PARTICIPANTS GRADUATE STUDENTS TO 37 NON-AMERICAN CITIZENS TO UNDERGRADUATES (49.33%) AMERICAN CITIZENS
38 36
STUDENTS FROM STUDENTS FROM EUROPEAN REGION NORTH AMERICAN REGION
8 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PARTICIPANTS’ COUNTRY OF RESIDENCE
U.S. 26 Hungary 5 Austria 2 Italy 1 Belgium 4 Poland 2 Canada 1 Spain 4 China 1 Sweden 2 France 3 Netherlands 1 Germany 3 U.K. 11
Students from 42 universities from across the world participated. Students pursuing degrees (undergraduate and graduate) in: UNIVERSITIES
7 LAW (10.45%) 18 ECONOMICS OR FINANCE (26.87%)
14 POLITICS, PUBLIC POLICY, PHILOSOPHY 9 INTERNATIONAL OR OR GOVERNMENT GLOBAL AFFAIRS (13.43%) (20.9%)
5 BUSINESS OR 6 ENGINEERING, PHYSICS, COMMUNICATIONS (7.46%) OR MATHEMATICS (8.96%)
4 COMPUTER SCIENCE (5.97%) 11 EUROPEAN STUDIES OR EUROPEAN GOVERNMENT (16.48%) Note: Some students are pursuing programs with multiple degrees
9 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS
10 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TESTIMONIALS
VIP & PARTICIPANT REMARKS
Ludovit Garzik (VIP) Managing Director Austrian Council for Research and Technology Development Founder Innovationorbit.com
“Digital Economy is our future. Some years ago nobody expected such a dynamic development in this sector that we can see today. The future will bring even more speed in the evolution of new processes and technologies.
European Horizons has chosen a perfect approach to involve young bright students into the discussion about the digital economy. The basic papers are full of new ideas without limitations or political constraints. This clear pic- ture will be confronted with the tight legal and social framework conditions.
It was a real pleasure to be part of this open setting and discussing the PHOTO CREDIT Margret Morris options for action of different stakeholder groups.”
11 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PARTICIPANT TESTIMONIALS
Lucie Audibert The London School of Economics and Political Science
“I had a fantastic experience at DEYS. I was particularly impressed by how demanding intellectually the conference was, both at the preparation stage and during discussions. We were really pushed to reconcile creativity and pragmatism, especially when confronted with feedback from industry and institutional experts. And most importantly, we felt our ideas were not only heard, but taken into serious consideration. I now feel empowered to have a real, tangible impact on what matters to me. But the most impressive part of the conference was the people it brought together–I met truly bright, inspiring, and driven people who have renewed my hope for what young people can achieve individually and collectively. These are people I know will accomplish great things, and whom I sincerely hope to meet again in the future. I am really grateful to European Horizons for the dedication they put into making this happen.”
Margret Morris Brigham Young University
“Going into the DEYS experience I expected to debate ideas, develop commu- nication skills, and broaden my understanding of the possibility of European Union’s future. I never would have suspected, however, that in a few days I would come to know and love so many different, interesting, and diverse people. We each had different objectives, different passions, different approaches, but transcending those differences was a common goal to push for the reality of a digital single market. Even more, we came to the summit open and willing to learn and listen to each other, to gain understanding and to appreciate a different point of view. This sampling of individuals from such diverse backgrounds was evidence to me that despite language, cultural, and priority differences there is hope and a very real possibility that the
12 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
EU project will continue to bring together, rather than divide, the whole of Europe while still maintaining the beautiful diversity that Europeans offer to an increasingly homogenized world.”
Nicolas Möes University of Oxford
“The DEYS was for me a unique opportunity to meet motivated people inter- ested in US-EU relations and in technology policy. Not only did I have the chance to share my ideas with students, industry representatives and poli- cy-makers who understood the importance of the issues at stake, but also to discuss these topics with people who have radically different views. The mix of all these different perspectives is probably the best approach to tackle digital policy across the Atlantic with valuable recommendations acceptable by all stakeholders and political constituencies. I really look forward to seeing how to transmit these insights to relevant decision-makers! Thank you Melina Sanchez and thank you European Horizons to organise this conference!”
Tabea Weiss Humboldt Universität Berlin
“I loved that we worked so future orientated but still practice based, that DEYS brought so many students from so different areas together. The expert talks were enjoyable, as was the first get together. I thought the feedback for our policy proposals was fruitful.”
13 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Tara Moore Boston University
“The creation of policy was very helpful because I would like to go into policy work for my career. Working with the team gave me real team experience. Networking was also very important and I have met some amazing people from the conference. Having the experts sit in on the panel was great because we got real feedback on how to truly implement our policies in reality.”
Danial Alam The London School of Economics and Political Science
“[ DEYS] Really surpassed my expectations, fantastic to work on the workshops with lots of very interesting and engaged people. Great talks as well. The Digital entrepreneurship workshop gave me an insight into practical aspects of the Digital Economy. I learned a lot from the panel discussion on Monday morning. But the workshop was by far most educational and beneficial part of the process, discussions throughout were really engaging because of the insight of experts and having people from all disciplines/countries.”
Rose Corbett University of Denver
“ DEYS was a very successful event. My group (Investing in Emerging Technologies) had excellent communication and I thought we were listening to each other very well. This made for a very open dialogue and room for con- structive criticism, which is what I was really interested in given a room full of such diverse students. I really enjoyed hearing from the CISCO and Google partners, as well as the final panel on a Digital Transatlantic Economy. They were very insightful, not only because of their status as professionals but in their interest in our cause at EuH.”
14 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
EUROPEAN HORIZONS
European Horizons emerged out of a group of Europeans studying in the United States of America who felt a deep sense of responsibility for the future of a more prosperous and confident European Union. Headquartered at Yale University and active through local chapters in 35+ universities across the USA and Europe, European Horizons pursues four objectives:
POLICY • European Horizons articulates ideas that explore European iden- tity, reform the social market economy, advance European integration, and deepen transatlantic relations.
NETWORK • European Horizons is developing a network that already includes undergraduate and graduate students from different American and European universities, professors from Yale, Harvard, Boston University, Columbia, and the London School of Economics, policy-makers from the European Commission, the European Parliament, US Congress and business executives from major corporations.
INNOVATION • By attracting business school students, young entrepre- neurs, and generally people with bright ideas, European Horizons is working on business plans that can have a direct positive social and economic impact on the European Union.
OUTREACH • European Horizons, which is based at Yale University, has also made it its mission to reach out to American society and inform the American public about the history, values, and global presence of the European Union.
15 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
What We Have Achieved So Far
• Third endorsement by the European Commission through the Erasmus+ Programme. • An inaugural European Student Conference at Yale University in February 2015 that brought together undergraduate and graduate students from 46 universities in the US and Europe, and dignitaries such as Pascal Lamy and David O’Sullivan. The Conference generated concrete policy propos- als for the future of the European Union. • Our second annual European Student Conference in February 2016 at the Yale School of Management bringing together 100 students from both sides of the Atlantic and connecting them with seasoned professors and ESC2016 policy-makers such as Klaus Welle, Kristalina Georgieva and Pierre Vimont. • Our first annual Spring Forum at the German Marshall Fund discussing ESC2017 transatlantic security with experts such as Constanze Stelzenmüller and Jane Harman, leading to policy papers as a concrete outcome. • The third issue of our academic journal, The Review of European & Transatlantic Affairs, that features a compendium of the conferences’ policy-papers as well as commentary from figures from academia, politics, and business. EUR PEAN • 35+ European Horizons chapters across the Unites States and Europe, H RIZONS including Harvard University, College of Europe, Stanford University, University of Barcelona and University of Wisconsin, among others. Our strategic partners are: the European Parliament and European Commission, ASKO Foundation and Yale University.
For more information, please visit our website at www.europeanhorizons.org For any questions, please contact us at [email protected]
16 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
EUROPEAN HORIZONS EXECUTIVE BOARD
Melina Sánchez Montañés Alex Frank Director, Board of Directors Head of Operations [email protected] [email protected]
Igor Mitschka Marianna Troia Director, Board of Directors Head of Conferences [email protected] [email protected]
Max Krahé Fabian Hutter Executive Director Head of Innovation [email protected] [email protected]
Niklas Deininger Sean Bray Deputy Executive Director Head of Chapters [email protected] [email protected]
Johanna Goehler [email protected] PHOTO CREDIT Elin Waldenström
17 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
DEYS TEAM
Elias Vere Nicoll DEYS Participants Coordinator [email protected]
Caterina Passoni Logistics Coordinator [email protected]
Me’lena Laudig [email protected]
Walter Wilson Logistics Coordinator [email protected]
Kushal Dev Publishing Coordinator [email protected]
Dimitra Chrysomallis College of Europe Logistics Coordinator [email protected]
Special Mentions to Photographers Elin Waldenström & Margret Morris
18 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
THE CONFERENCE
19 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
CLOSING SPEECH OF THE YOUTH SUMMIT
European Horizons Head of Operations, Alex Frank
Thank you. I would first like to thank all of our speakers and senior partic- ipants. Many travelled long distances to share their expert views with us. Next I would like to thank our generous supporters, Google, Generali, the European Commission and ETNO. Thank you Ms. Chrysomallis and Rector Monar for your generous hospitality. Thank you to all of the participants. You have shown tremendous dedication and bold thinking throughout the European Horizons Head of Operations, Alex Frank past few weeks. Thank you Elin and Maggie for volunteering to be photogra- phers. And finally thank you Melina and Elias for your tireless work organiz- PHOTO CREDIT Margret Morris ing this conference.
20 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
I want to talk today about dignity. Through my studies in law and travels in Europe I developed a strong appreciation for European societies and their emphasis on dignity. As an American looking in from the outside, I believe that a social state built around dignity is what distinguishes Europe from the rest of the world. The state and society ensures each person has the basic means needed to lead a dignified life—housing, transportation, quality food, and a rigorous education. In addition, your dignity is protected in the public sphere. Laws regulate hate speech and there is a strong sense of basic social respect.
There are three important things about dignity I would like you to take away from this conference. First, it plays a major role in the digital econ- omy. European privacy rights stem from dignity. Industry disruption makes it a challenge to maintain the dignity that comes with meaningful work. Second, in a large part because of this turbulence and insecurity, dignity is under threat in Europe and the United States. Far-right political movements seek to erase many of the gains painstakingly built over the past decades. This makes it more important now than ever for student organizations like European Horizons to create forums like this one. Third, at European Horizons, we aim to build a more confident union through social integration. We need dignity to accomplish this. The need is more pressing now than ever for us to confront these difficult issues.
There are many great opportunities in the digital economy. The opening panel discussed how we can translate Europe’s strong knowledge economy into more tangible action. My workshop looked at how some companies are moving their digital services to places with stringent privacy laws in order to foster more trust with consumers. We can broaden access to education. There are exciting possibilities on the horizon for the future of work. Big data can be harnessed in amazing ways to serve the social good. “Magic,” as Ms. Junius said.
But there are also many challenges. The digital economy is “Janus faced” as Rector Monar said. Online discourse challenges dignity. When you select a video from one side of the political spectrum, algorithms suggest similar media that can suck you deeper and deeper into your partisan bubble.
21 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Maintaining our sense mutual respect that stems from dignity is challenging in such circumstances.
The workshop on Job Creation in Times of Industry Disruption looked at how to maintain social peace in the face of rapidly changing demands of emerg- ing of digital markets and industries. Our job gives us a meaningful place in society that carries with it a sense of dignity. Making work meaningful for all parts of society in this context, not just the elite with the knowledge to take advantage of the digital sphere, is a major challenge.
My workshop, the Data Security workshop, looked at how dignity serves as the basis for the European emphasis on privacy rights. The government empowers you to maintain a dignified public image and helps you protect the integrity of your private life. These rights were typically viewed as a hin- drance to the economy, but there are signs that this is changing. Microsoft recently moved their cloud headquarters to Munich—home to some of the most stringent privacy regulations in existence—in order to demonstrate its commitment to upholding the dignity of its consumers. The challenge is to cut through the typical misunderstandings that stem from the complexity of the digital economy and create trust between businesses, citizens, and government, and so to ride the waves of change in the digital economy with dignity and poise.
Dignity is especially pertinent given the resurgence of movements that oppose it. The far-right both in the United States and in Europe opposes dignity, often with foreign backing from Russia. The recent election in the United States featured many offenses to dignity and instances of disrespect to many groups, including disenfranchised ones. I can understand that many of their supporters have a sense of being neglected and left behind by the rapidly changing world. Many of them are experiencing social breakdown. As Mr. Trichet said, it would be “regrettable to deplore” these people.
22 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
But we cannot let this stand, we must use dignity as the antidote. The far-right comes in many shapes and sizes, but all build social solidarity by tapping the fear of an out-group. European Horizons, on the other hand, builds social solidarity through dignity. Dignity builds solidarity not exclusive towards one group or another. Each group is recognized for its intrinsic value and the contribution it makes to the broader society.
Dignity forms the basis for social integration. The society works together to recognize the inherent value in each one of us and each group. It furnishes us with the rights and means to live as independent and discrete entities. But it also means we have the responsibility to recognize the inherent value in other groups and play a constructive role in working towards a better society. When we talk of social integration this is what we really mean: each group or member of society exists as its own discrete entity, but is also part of a greater whole with a meaningful and constructive role to play. Where race, religion, or creed was the uniting factor, dignity comes in as the more inclu- sive uniting factor even if its exact meaning is contested.
The digital economy provides a perfect microcosm for this. The danger is that we forget our responsibilities towards one another and fragment further into our own groups, our own partisan echo chambers. The opportunity is that we harness the amazing interconnectedness to further dignity and the social good.
This is why we are building forums like this one. At European Horizons we are dedicated to respectfully challenging the status quo and hosting constructive dialogue around tough challenges like social integration. “Our mission is, through organizing events, connecting people, and putting forward new ideas, to weave a more integrated social fabric in Europe and to strengthen the confidence of our Union.” We want to break down the partisan bubbles and echo chambers by creating youth engagement and constructive discourse. As one participant in our leadership day said, “European Horizons is the needle to the bubble.” Weaving a more integrated social fabric can only be done with dignity. Blaming some outgroup is obsolete, and indeed deplorable.
23 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
This event marks our new turn as a truly transatlantic think tank. The signifi- cance of this is immense. What started as a small group of friends discussing EU problems over dinner in a Yale dining hall has grown to encompass chapters on both sides of the Atlantic. We are the only transatlantic student network around EU affairs. We include Europeans studying at universities in the US, American Europhiles such as myself, and an ever increasing num- ber—hopefully many more after this conference—of Europeans in Europe. We are starting to build links globally. Our hope is to maintain these links as alumni and fill the important EU-related positions in Europe and the US.
In closing, let me stress that this is the time for student networks to face up to the difficult challenges facing theEU and the transatlantic relationship. The need is more pressing than ever. Political establishments everywhere are in upheaval, and students must step up and confront these problems. I hope all of you will continue our discussion back in your home chapters or with your group of friends and colleagues that will form your future chapter. The possi- bilities now are greater than ever.
And so, I now close this youth conference. I wish you all a safe trip home. I aim to be on the 16:32 train and hope to see you on it. Be well.
24 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
POLICY PAPERS
25 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
I. Transatlantic Data Protection Workshop
TOPICS • Transatlantic Data Protection: How can this be done in a way that respects both the American tradition of entrepreneurship and European values around data protection? • Privacy Shield: Following the recent overhaul of the Safe Harbour Principles and the approval of the EU-US Privacy Shield, European and American companies are concerned about implications in terms of data flow and economic costs. How can we address these new concerns? • Digital Government: Digital government can have many benefits for encouraging innovation. Estonia is recognised as a global leader in this area. Yet, it also raises cyber-security problems, as evidenced by recent Russian cyber attacks. What are the main lessons to be drawn from Estonia’s e-government for the rest of Europe and the US?
Entrepreneurship Panel— Guests: Fabian Hutter (European Horizons), Alexis Eggermont (Real Impact Analytics), Leonar- do Quattrucci (European Politi- cal Strategy Centre | European Commission)
PHOTO CREDIT Margret Morris
26 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TOPIC Passenger Name Record Data and Mass Surveillance
AUTHORED BY Sara De Carvalho, Alexander Sullivan, Tabea Weiss, and Jiangtian Xu
OBSERVATIONS The Transatlantic Data Protection Workshop observes the following:
1. The Passenger Name Record (PNR) system contains all the information necessary to enable reservations to be processed and controlled by the booking and participating air carriers for each journey booked by, or on, behalf of any person. PNR data are related to travel movements, usually flights, and include passport data, names, addresses, telephone num- bers, travel agents, credit card numbers, histories of changes in the flight schedule, seat preferences, and other information. The PNR is considered to be an essential tool in effectively fighting international terrorism and organized crime.
2. Civilians’ rights can be infringed upon through the privacy invasions caused by the above form of data processing. Indeed, when considering the system of PNR, a fair balance should always be struck between secu- rity and privacy, which does not overstep the transmission of the neces- sary number of data elements required in national security matters.
1 “Commission Imple- 3. US intelligence agencies seeking to access and monitor the data of EU menting Decision (EU)”. 12 July, 2016. Official residents may do so under the European Commission’s enumerated Journal of the European exceptions. Such exceptions include matters of national security and Union. Annex 2; Scope. 12 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ law enforcement investigations. Under the scope of such an exception, legal-content/EN/TXT/ an individual is not afforded arbitration in light of potential violation of ?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_. 1 2016.207.01.0001.01. Privacy Shield principles. Policies to provide appropriate safeguards ENG&toc=OJ:L:2016: for such data exist to “reasonably... minimize the[ir] dissemination and 207:FULL
27 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
2 2 “Commission Imple- retention.” We find this language to be ambiguous and prone to misuse menting Decision (EU)”. 12 July, 2016. Official and misunderstanding. Journal of the European Union. Paragraph 84. http://eur-lex.europa. US eu/legal-content/EN/TX- 4. The Privacy Shield contains detailed requirements for organizations to T/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_. safeguard EU residents’ personal data. However, in consideration of the 2016.207.01.0001.01. ENG&toc=OJ:L:2016:207: fact that such certification is both self-imposed and self-regulated, they FULL#ntr91-L_2016207 are insufficient in their ultimate goal of protection.3 EN.01000101-E0091
3 Maldoff, Gabe. “We read privacy shield so you don’t have to”. Privacy 5. The Court of Justice has ruled that the retention of mass data, in under- Tracker. 7 March, 2016. standing of their potential value in maintaining public safety, is a matter https://iapp.org/news/a/ 4 we-read-privacy-shield- of general interest and thus allowable. so-you-dont-have-to/
4 “Judgement of the court (Grand Chamber)”. The manner of data collection is formatted in such a way that “intelli- InfoCuria. 8 April 2014. gence activities often focus on preventing threats to national security Paragraph 42. http:// curia.europa.eu/juris/ before harm has occurred. Therefore, such investigations may often have document/document. jsf?docid=150642&do- to cover a broader range of possible actors (‘targets’) and a wider geo- clang=EN graphic area”. 5 “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Court of Review”. Federal 6. The US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court grants various types Judicial Center. http:// www.fjc.gov/history/ of government requests including wiretapping, data analysis, and other home.nsf/page/courts_ special_fisc.html monitoring for “foreign intelligence purposes” of suspected terrorists and spies operating in the United States.5 6 Dia, Kayyali. “What you need to know..” Electronic Frontier Foundation. 15 August To collect such information, the government must demonstrate to a 2014. https://www.eff. 6 org/deeplinks/2014/08/ judge its relevance to an international terrorism investigation. The what-you-need-know- anticipatory nature of anti-terror intelligence, however, has made rather about-fisa-court-and- how-it-needs-change broad and continual surveillance the norm, rather than assessing indi- vidual surveillance requests. This pattern sets a dangerous precedent: continuing these continual surveillance practices erodes the citizens’ basic privacy, and brings with it questions concerning automated deci- sion making based on algorithms and in effect, of profiling.
7. Broad interpretations of mass surveillance and bulk data collection by the Court of Justice and FISA Court, in accordance with exceptions for
28 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
7 “Judgement of the court national security and law enforcement, undermine the effectiveness of (Grand Chamber)”. InfoCuria. 8 April 2014. safeguards intended to limit access and use of public data, and protect Paragraph 42. http:// EU residents. curia.europa.eu/juris/ document/document. jsf?docid=150642&do- clang=EN POLICY VISION 8 “Opinion on the EU-- The Transatlantic Data Protection Workshop believes that: U.S. Privacy Shield draft adequacy decision” Euro- pean Data Protection Supervisor. April 2016. 1. The appropriate use of PNR data will be vital in the prevention, detection, https://secure.edps.euro- pa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/ investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crimes. A site/mySite/shared/Doc- legitimate concern for protecting innocent civilian life and avoiding other uments/Consultation/ Opinions/2016/16-05-30_ serious crimes outweighs the data privacy of individual citizens, as noted Privacy_Shield_EN.pdf p. by the Court of Justice upon grounds of general interest.7 10.
2. Specifying the purposes for which data are collected, not later than at the time of data collection, with the understanding that data should be limited to the accomplishment of the aforementioned purposes in point one, will ensure the adequate protection of data privacy of EU residents. A breach of this principle should be considered an unlawful processing of personal data. Basic principles of purpose limitation (i.e. proportionality) should be respected in instances in which there is no imminent threat of terrorism or serious crime.
3. Codification of a sound legal basis, which determines the presence of necessity and proportionality ex ante in matters of mass surveillance, will help ensure EU residents remain safe while privacy is respected. This is to say, only when there are clear guidelines on how to handle matters of surveillance, which explain both the requisite need for surveilling, and the amount of data which can be collected, will instances of privacy infringement be meaningfully reduced. The processing and transfer of financial messaging data TFTP( ) serves as a relevant precedent.8
4. A standardization of adequacy certification which is consequently enforced by an independent third-party commission will enhance objec- tivity in the assessment of an organization’s ability and commitment
29 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
to upholding privacy principles. This will replace the current system of adequacy certification which relies on self-certification and minimal over- sight. A joint US-EU commission, potentially consisting of legal experts, policy makers, and data protection technicians, will help to maintain objectivity and reduce instances of inadequacy.
PARTICIPANTS STRATEGY The participants of the Transatlantic Data Protection Workshop in order to realize their vision intend to:
1. Advocate for the establishment of clear rules on the boundaries of EU PNR data, and other data collected by government agencies and private enterprises, between the EU and United States in the form of government regulations. To avoid an abuse of PNR data, and also to take accountabil- ities of individual officials, government agencies, and private enterprises for potential misconduct, unambiguous rules and regulations must be in place along with mechanisms of checks and balances which mitigate unwarranted abuse and misconduct.
2. Develop and implement training courses for individuals and organiza- tions handling PNR data. In order to familiarize the EU PNR standards and operational processes associated with PNR data, for both EU and US stakeholders, establishing codifiedSOP (Standard Operation Procedures) regarding usage and limitations of EU PNR data is of the utmost impor- tance. This includes providing clear definitions of “terrorism-related crime and serious crimes including organized crimes” within the criminal purposes of the collection and retention of data.
3. Coordinate annual meetings of various stakeholders including, but not limited to, airline companies, travel agencies, law enforcement agencies, legal experts, and governmental organizations. The meetings will facil- itate and enhance coordination and cooperation among these entities, provide a platform to disseminate information regarding new develop- ments, review and discuss current implementation methods and SOP,
30 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
and allow for critical analysis of the effects of PNR data on the rights of citizens.
4. Enact short-term and long-term mechanisms for systematically and effectively monitoring compliance with Privacy Shield principles.
SHORT-TERM: Precise language concerning an organization’s designa- tion as “adequate” must be agreed upon. As discussed in point four of our Observations, there is a gap in regulatory standards stemming from self-regulation policies. To address these insufficient compliance assur- ances, we propose on-site inspections for self-regulating organizations claiming to be in accordance with privacy principles. Penalties shall be imposed for violators.
LONG-TERM: Develop and implement a third-party joint US/EU commis- sion with a wide array of expertise to oversee and verify compliance in long-term. This will include assessments of initial adequacy, and a pro- cedural case-by-case process of assessing exceptions based on national security, based on sound legal basis to be determined.
5. Enhance transparency mechanisms of both governmental agencies and private organizations. Implement an annual report on behalf of EuroPol, the CIA, and the FBI which provides a comprehensive and consolidated database of private data usage for national security purposes, including combatting terrorism and serious crime.
• The types of information (i.e. individual data elements) which are collected for national security purposes must be published in a con- spicuous manner in the annual report.
• Each instance in which data have been collected for national security purposes must be published in chronological order, citing the fulfill- ment of the purpose requirement.
31 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TOPIC Reconciling Differing Approaches to Privacy
AUTHORED BY Mihaiela-Marcela Corsatea, Shushanik Hakobyan, Maria Stefania Magierska, and Ricardo van Mildert
OBSERVATIONS The Data Security Workshop observes the following:
1. The 261-page final draft of theEU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which replaces Directive 95/46/EC (Directive), was formally approved by the EU Parliament on April 14, 2016. The GDPR will apply, and enforcement will commence, two years from the date of entry into force, i.e., approximately in early July 2018. The endorsement of the GDPR is an important step in updating the law of privacy and data protection in the EU as a unified, homogeneous whole, where one sole law becomes the chief vehicle to govern the activities of very diverse countries in a particular domain. GDPR will be enforceable not only to all entities that function in the EU/EEA and collect or process personal data in the EU/ EEA, but also to a variety of entities formed outside the EU or EEA. “Single rule almost all the time” will be applicable. The new rule is outlined as a “regulation” rather than a directive. That implies that it is applicable in each EU member states and does not need to be transposed into each country’s legal framework.
2. While in Europe data protection is heavily regulated on the EU and state levels, in the US data protection approaches are decentralized and as a result ruled mainly by market players. In the US, there is no all-inclusive law regulating the collection and processing of personal data. Instead, data protection is regulated by many state and federal laws often influ- enced by lobbyists representing large industries and their corporate interests.
32 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
3. The different approaches to privacy are deeply rooted in the culture and the history of both the EU and the USA. The American concept of privacy is very much related to the concept of liberty, where the private life, and especially the privacy of the home, are always balanced against the fun- damental liberty of the market and the freedom of speech. Continental privacy protections, on the other hand, are linked to the right to respect and to personal dignity, the right to one’s image, name, and reputation, as well as the right to control the sorts of information disclosed about oneself, closely related to the idea of honor and self-creation.
These perspectives seem very much at odds. But, we believe there is sig- nificant common ground and we can find a synthesis between them. This is especially true when looking at another historical explanation of the privacy protection in Europe, which focuses on the 20th century European totalitarian regimes invading the private, family life. The European con- cept of privacy, in this theory, very much focuses on the privacy of the family life, very much in line with the American approach to privacy of the home. Moreover, while there are various differences in the protection of privacy, differences in the right to privacy are largely overstated.
The recent EU-US Privacy Shield seems to be not a sufficient tool for protecting EU citizens’ data in the United States. Introduced in 2016 as a replacement for invalid Safe Harbor pact, the Privacy Shield does not solve major problems of transatlantic data protection system. As much as the reconciliation between US and EU approach to the discussed topic is necessary, it shall not be done in a way that puts market interests above the human rights. Furthermore, the Privacy Shield is not adequately adapted to the GDPR.
The main concern about the EU-US Privacy Shield is the concept of self-certification by which US organizations commit to a set of privacy principles and an arbitration system provided as a procedure of com- plaint in case of violation of data privacy rights. Moreover, the EU-US Privacy Shield obliges the United States to create the Privacy Shield Ombudsperson, who is independent from the intelligence community. Nevertheless, the discussed policy does not elaborate on the detailed competences of the ombudsperson. Another thing is lack of the complex regulations in such crucial issues as
33 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
profiling. This holes make a field for wide and not necessarily pro-citizen legal interpretations. Such solutions do not strengthen the part that is already weaker—the citizen—but rather allow companies to use their economic prevalence.
This difference also influences theEU and US view on the protection of the self-image, which is especially important in the light of the rise in social media and the basic role social media play in the socialization of young adults. The right to self-image is a primary right for every human being, closely related to the autonomy. However, whereas Americans focus mainly on protecting their image against the intrusion into their (private) lives, Europeans focus primarily on the right to informational self-determination and against the dissemination of information that could hurt their self-image. Whereas the right to the protection of one’s image is protected in the EU, e.g. Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) (European Court of Human Rights), in the US the focus is on the right of publicity, which is recognized as a purely economic property tort.
4. Lastly, the largest American Internet companies, such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, IBM, and Microsoft, have been intending of building large data centres in the EU for several years. All of them already provide cloud services to corporate customers that intend to keep their data in the continent, both for security and legal requirements. By doing so they pursue higher data protection for their clients.
5. It’s of the utmost importance to have hard skilled people, policy makers and public relations experts working together and engaging in dialogue to create narratives, to increase transparency and trust between public institutions and civil society regarding protection of privacy and data collection.
34 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
POLICY VISION The Data Security Workshop believes that:
1. As a policy vision, we suggest setting up a framework that will bring together the European and US data protection regulations. This frame- work will enable the comparison and analysis of the complex differences and diverse aspects of two systems. Our vision is that policymakers can learn from this framework and base their decisions on a well-defined and evidence model that we will detail in our strategy.
2. Furthermore, as a policy recommendation we propose setting up inter- disciplinary institutions on EU, state and international levels. These institutions would include expert groups from various fields, such as economists, legal experts, policy makers, technical data protection experts, sociologists etc. This will ensure the objectivity and impartiality of these organizations. Their goals will differ from analysing the EU-wide regulations and their reasoning to international EU-US cooperation on finding best practices of data protection regulation.
3. Moreover, we believe that a new legal construct of EU and US data protec- tion’s policy in the same time shall reconcile values of both cultures and protect human rights. That would require:
• Changing the complaint procedure by allowing to sue the violator of the privacy;
• Reestablishing the self-certification system by introducing stronger conditions on the side of entrepreneur;
• Giving more specific competences for the ombudsperson (e.g. acting on its own initiative);
• Protecting the EU citizens against automated decisions;
• Limiting the access by public authorities to data transferred under Privacy Shield, taking into account the European dignity approach towards privacy.
35 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
4. Besides this, the new legal construct, should have firm rules with strong enforcement while allowing for businesses to maintain a sense of owner- ship and autonomy. These rules should focus on:
• Regulating in a way that gives discretion to private companies;
• Having formal forums for explaining the rules, thus increasing and creating transparency;
• Engaging the narratives behind the rules in the public domain through public forums, stimulating the dialogue with citizens.
5. By doing so, respecting privacy becomes a form of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), both implicitly and explicitly, thus creating a situa- tion where companies are competing to show they uphold dignity better than other ones. Whereas European companies show CSR more implic- itly, by complying to the European laws, American companies have more explicit CSR and use it as a marketing tool and a way to build a positive image. By increasing transparency and public involvement, privacy pro- tection becomes an important part of a company’s CSR, which, especially for American companies, adds an incentive to comply with the European standard of dignity protection. For example, Microsoft moved their headquarters to Munich because of the strong regulations, it lets people know they are giving consumers more ability to control their public face. Companies can be viewed as performing a positive social function.
6. While trying to build a stronger bridge for the transatlantic dialogue, one should start with identifying the main principles of the rights (since there are different approaches in US and EU legislation respectively) and reconcile them under a new treaty, adapted to the economic needs of the 21st century (the business sector should be allowed to extend—this will help national economies as well—while making a compromise with the national institutions). Trading human rights for business is not a solution either, but drawing some limits (with clearly identified boundar- ies) regarding how much self-image can be protected by the state might be a step forward. Any attempt should take both the liberty and dignity approach to privacy into account.
36 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PARTICIPANTS’ STRATEGY The participants of the Data Security Workshop in order to realize their vision intend to:
1. As a specific policy implementation strategy in theEU , we suggest creating an institution that will serve as a platform for interdisciplinary cooperation for data protection. It will include experts from legal, tech- nological, economic and social fields. Together these experts will have a transparent debate and represent public opinion that would serve as a basis for the further regulation. In a sense, this new institution will be a council or an advisory board for policy makers in the EU parliament. As an interdisciplinary organization it will be objective and diverse in its meth- odology and conclusions, thus advising on data protection regulations in accordance with current public opinion and professional expertise. This institution will mainly harmonize the regulations within EU member states to make sure every country is on the same ground. It’s important to have both high-skilled people, policy makers, as well as public relations experts to create narratives, to increase transparency and trust between public institutions and civil society regarding protection of privacy and data collection. The institution won’t be future-proof but future-oriented, since the future is constantly changing, and being proactive will help us to adapt to new challenges timely.
2. Another policy suggestion is setting up an expert commission that will analyse the complex systems of the EU and the US data protection legis- lation, as well as their differences, similarities and defining aspects. This commission would be an international cooperation platform where the EU and the US can learn about the advantages and weaknesses of one another in terms of data protection laws. As a result best practices will be derived and applied by both parties. This commission should be strictly professional and scientific, so that its research and recommendations are impartial and scientifically evidenced. This institution’s focus would be mainly on transatlantic scope.
3. Both institutions will strongly support evidence based policy making based on an extensive review of research and in-depth interviews with
37 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
government officials, practitioners, and academic experts. In order to evaluate how efficient a certain data protection policy is, it is indispens- able to analyse cross country data. This means data collection on many related variables should be also strongly enforced. Availability of such data for independent think tanks, academics and scholars brings a new level of validity to decision making. This means that the robustness of this or that decision can be checked by replicating the research of our newly proposed institutions by analysing publicly available data. This frame- work identifies steps that both the executive and legislative branches can take to drive the development, funding, implementation, and monitoring of policies and programs. It’s crucial to have skill enhancing workshops for policymakers develop future oriented skills for technocrats, a regu- lator cannot regulate something he does not know anything about, for example teach policy makers about important aspects of digital world.
4. We need to analyse data privacy politics of particular entrepreneurs in order to find out how they respect theEU -US Privacy Shield policy and draw a chapter of lessons learned. By observing the previous ECJ decisions (Schrems) we can notice that there is no significant difference between the already invalid Safe Harbour and the current Privacy Shield complying with the actual EU and US legislation on data protection and the circumstances allowing data transfers to third countries. There is a need for an elaboration of a strong research document on the past fail- ures that could enable experts to better foresee the negative outcomes of the superficiality of the treaties already implemented. The failures of addressing this need to adapt legislation to current realities are reflected in the Schrems Case, which concluded that “the protection of human rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data which has been transferred from a Member State to that third country do not always contends how the law and practices in force in the third country ensure (or not) an adequate level of protection.”
38 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
9 U.S. Department of TOPIC Commerce. “Fact Sheet Overview of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Frame- The EU-US Privacy Shield Agreement work”. www.commerce. gov. AUTHORED BY 10 European Commission “Commission decisions Akis Kattis, Anna Raiß, Elisabeth Weisswange, and Chunxiao Zhang on the adequacy of the protection of personal data in third countries” ec.europa.eu OBSERVATIONS The Data Security Workshop observes the following: 11 BBC “EU watchdogs permit Privacy Shield to run for one year” www. bbc.com 1. The EU-US Privacy Shield Framework builds the most recent platform for companies on both sides of the Atlantic to comply with EU data protec- tion requirements when transferring personal data from the European Union to the United States in support of transatlantic commerce. Furthermore, the Privacy Shield builds on the ground covered by the Safe Harbour agreement, strengthening aspects related to the privacy con- cerns outlined by the CJEU in accordance with EU privacy regulations.
In July 2016, the Privacy Shield Framework passed the adequacy test laid down in Article 25 of the EU Data Protection Directive. It provides a legiti- mate basis for transferring personal data to the US.
2. The European Union acknowledges critique however the EU will not challenge the framework within the first year after implementation. In general, the EU will not loosen its strong position regarding personal data protection.
Criticism from both sides of the Atlantic pose a challenge to the framework.
From the European side, there is an ongoing critique by civil society organizations that are sceptic regarding the effect of the privacy agree- ment. For example, the organization “Digital Rights Ireland” filed a legal challenge to Privacy Shield. From the American perspective, the demands imposed by the agreement imply an increased administrative complexity
39 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
especially for SMEs and Start-ups. The Privacy Shield is therefore per- ceived as a burden with the potential to threaten entrepreneurship. In general, the public is uninformed as individuals are still not aware of their rights. Further, the private as well as public sector criticize surveil- lance practices of each of the 28 EU member states and the United States.
3. The discrepancies between privacy laws of EU member states, with respect to those in the United States, form the basis for a need to bridge the transatlantic differences on data retention policies in a streamlined fashion that does not add a disproportionate burden to technology companies and SMEs investing in the EU.
POLICY VISION The Data Security Workshop believes that:
1. The Privacy Shield is an important step forward in the area of transatlan- tic data protection. It provides a set of robust and enforceable protection for the data of EU individuals. As a result, the Privacy Shield does not put too much burden on commerce and does not inhibit digital entrepre- neurship. Indeed, the regulatory framework can be used to foster trust between companies and consumers, as both sides of the Atlantic have to commit to the same obligations. In general, it provides a clear guidance for what constitutes an adequate level of protection for individuals over their personal data and serves as a conduit for transferring EU citizens’ personal data to the US.
2. The Privacy Shield can be used as an innovation tool, for example to pro- tect SMEs. The Privacy Shield self-certification can attract customers and therefore can be seen as a marketing tool as well. The potential of serving as innovation and marketing tool should be fostered more, as the Privacy Shield needs to become an internationally acknowledged label.
3. The Privacy Shield Framework can provide robust protection for EU citizens not only because of the detailed requirements, but also the enforcement mechanism design. However, it is acknowledged that the
40 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Privacy Shield poses some difficulties for enterprises in terms of access to information and might therefore seem not transparent. As a result, clear and simple instructions are necessary.
The Privacy Shield contains detailed requirements for organizations to safeguard residents’ personal data. Privacy professionals need to consider various reforms in anticipation of the Privacy Shield’s imple- mentation. As a result, this complex process should be facilitated and be supported with material in an easy-to-understand language.
4. In the long term perspective, the Privacy Shield should be implemented in the form of trade agreement. Thereby it could serve as an important trade enabler fostering commerce and data protection. By being enforced as an international treaty the Privacy Shield could become an ordinary way to process data worldwide and not only on the occasion of interna- tional data transfers.
PARTICIPANTS’ STRATEGY The participants of the Data Security Workshop in order to realize their vision intend to:
1. The agreement is complex as it is composed of a collection of legal instruments, letters and annexes rather than a single, easily understand- able document. The measures it proposes are multifaceted which is why adequate support needs to be given from the authorities.
Support from the Commission in its commitment to support companies with the implementation of data protection regulation is essential. First of all, clear legal definitions are needed to avoid different interpretations of the application of the Privacy Shield. Then, external consultants should help established enterprises and start-ups set up structures and provide clear guidance. However, continuous support from consultants is essen- tial. Here, Article 29 Working Party might help in providing useful guid- ance. The new Data Protection Board should also use its role to support SMEs and start-ups.
41 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
2. An incentive system for companies needs to be designed to promote the concept of enforceable self-certifications. This will decrease the assump- tion of the privacy regulation being regarded as a burden. If the Privacy Shield is promoted as a trade-mark, it will foster trust between consum- ers and customers.
As an example one can point out to Microsoft Corporation which set up a headquarters in Munich, Germany, due to the city’s strict regulatory bur- dens. The idea is that it will help the company meet growing demands for cloud services across Europe, by providing an innovative cloud comput- ing platform combined with a German data trustee model. This business strategy fosters both trust and revenue simultaneously.
In order to promote data protection as a trademark, a marketing strategy needs to be developed. Standardized information campaigns about the customer benefits and securities should be initiated to inform the public. Companies need to be provided with detailed information material to the customers.
3. Start-ups and entrepreneurs should have easy access to privacy lawyers to facilitate an understanding of the framework and to develop new data- based business models. This means privacy lawyers should be included in the process when a start-up is being built. Staff at all levels should be equipped with a legal and normative awareness of privacy and data protection. Digital ethics trainings should be offered to engineers and technicians. Data protection experts should be included in hub environ- ments so they become an integral part of the start-up ecosystem. This new synergy should lead to the development of business models based on the principles of data protection. This in turn will lead to increased consumer trust while simultaneously fostering entrepreneurship.
In addition, the development of a streamlined yet minimally burdensome framework tailored specifically forSME s and start-ups up to a given size, would encourage innovators to flourish in theEU without concern about issues of regulation and compliance. This would also provide momentum for the expansion of US-based SMEs into the EU digital services market.
42 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
II. Investing in Emerging New Technologies Workshop
TOPICS: Investing in Emerging New Technologies: How can the US and the European Union work together to develop and implement new digital tech- nologies? The American and European technological spheres are the most advanced in the world. However, there is much to gain from a deepened joint effort in investing, developing and adopting these technologies.
Regulation: How can the US and the European Union set prudent reg- ulation for innovative and sometimes controversial technologies such as artificial intelligence?
Industry4.0: How do we manage the incorporation of tech into the manufacturing sector? The possibilities for productivity and economic growth are immense
Social entrepreneurship: How do we use digital technologies to address important social problems such as the integration of refugees?
PHOTO CREDIT
Elin Waldenström
43 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
POLICY PAPERS
TOPIC Social Entrepreneurship
AUTHORED BY Patricia Austria, Rose Corbett, Tara Moore, and Katre Rugo
OBSERVATIONS The Social Entrepreneurship workshop observes the following:
1. Given the current refugee crisis, roughly 1 million people entered the EU in 2015 escaping conflict in their country in search of peace and better economic prospects. Integration into new societies in Europe is very difficult for many refugees due to a number of restrictions which leave them feeling marginalized such as the inability to travel freely and settle in more stable living conditions, differences in language, and insufficient academic and career eligibility in their country of relocation. In addition to these challenges, refugees are socio-economically more vulnerable, facing challenges in the job search.
2. Investing in technological innovation and entrepreneurship can provide creative solutions to social challenges within Europe. Digital tools allow us to engage multiple stakeholders to not only leverage strengths and collaboratively pursue solutions, but also to provide a platform for these vulnerable communities to ensure we understand the issues in their entirety and complexity.
3. The most prevalent use of technology in the refugee space is the dis- semination of information to the populace. Technology’s ability to cross boundaries, bridge divides and create opportunities is critical as Europe tackles integration, assimilation and challenges concerning develop- ment. Furthermore, investments in social entrepreneurship deliver the agency back to individuals and communities. At its heart, social
44 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
innovation can leverage the power of technology to crowd-source solu- tions by empowering creativity, entrepreneurship and problem-solving.
POLICY VISION The Social Entrepreneurship workshop envisions the following:
1. Promoting entrepreneurship among refugee youth is pivotal to the sustainable advancement of refugee communities. Encouraging young refugees to take part in entrepreneurial activities creates an entry point for young leaders to foster managerial skills and business knowledge. Furthermore, the economic opportunities created from entrepreneurship go beyond donations and relief aid by providing recurrent and sustain- able income for both individuals and communities. We believe that there is a need for the established and sustained support of youth entrepre- neurship among refugee youth by organizing networking events. We find that creating networking events to bring together refugee youth and experts from various fields of business fosters more personal-level con- nections and in addition to encouraging entrepreneurship, help integrate young refugees into their new societies simply by introducing them to the local community. Such events would take place similarly as trade fairs where either:
a. Creation of online entrepreneurial hubs to provide comprehensive, far-reaching and long-lasting support to entrepreneurial ideas and social innovation. The hub will take the form of a web platform that helps to establish mentor-mentee relations. We encourage the devel- opment of entrepreneurial skills by connecting the refugee youth with experts from various areas who could provide advice and guidance on implementing new ideas and matching them as potential interns or employees.
b. (local) businesses interested in finding people for their team as interns or employees could come and connect with young refugees or
c. business mentors would help young people with their own business ideas by providing some guidelines and/or contacts.
45 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
2. In addition, we would like to make resources available on how to start a business, legal contracts, technology development and more with the help of these networking events. These resources will enable youth to feel empowered to participate in the local business culture and communities. Resources will be accessible to all youth that take part in the events and can be used with recommendation from mentor or upon personal interests
3. It is critically important that youth entrepreneurship not just be sup- ported but invested in. While we believe that the best ideas should be incubated and forwarded, it is also important to encourage a wide range of ideas to show that entrepreneurship is not a luxury for the few but a direct product of sound ideas and hard work. As such, we propose two ways in which youth can garner funding for their idea: “The Open Market” and “The Competition.”
• “The Open Market” is modeled after many of today’s crowd-sourc- ing platforms such as Kickstarter and Kiva. Youth (ages 15-25), as individuals or teams, post their business ideas onto the platform where people all over Europe and the world can decide to monetarily support these projects. The general populace continues to search for ways to support refugees but there are limited avenues to do so outside providing support to large NGOs. The Open Market allows for a direct line of support to those on the ground. Furthermore, this provides an opportunity for citizens to see the potential, skills and creativity that refugees have. This will hopefully counter the negative perception that refugees contribute little to society and provide a creative platform for understanding, support and integration.
• “The Competition” takes the most promising ideas from the market through an entrepreneurship competition where judges will review their business plans/presentations to award large seed funding to get their ideas off the ground.
46 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PARTICIPANTS’ STRATEGY The Social Entrepreneurship workshop would like to implement the follow- ing initiatives:
1. Bring together local community representatives and IT experts (e.g. students from universities, volunteers) to address local problems that refugees are facing by creating digital solutions such as applications and/or websites which would help foster the integration of refugees. This could take place in the form of a hackathon where the best ideas with most potential would be selected and potentially further supported by local, national or supranational institutions. Successful outcomes should be publicised to encourage similar cooperation at the local level.
2. Approach business associations or (large) businesses to draw their atten- tion to refugee youth as a potential workforce and advocate in organising job fairs or open door days where entrepreneurs could introduce their business and find new employees among refugees. Since providing jobs for refugees is also in the interest of local governments, it would also be useful to engage them in the process since they could provide organiza- tional help and spread information about the initiative.
3. Launch events where business mentors would help young people with their own business ideas by providing some guidelines and/or contacts.
47 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TOPIC Regulation
AUTHORED BY Lucie Audibert, Berk Coker, Marius Constantin, Alexander Hutterer, Nicolas Möes, and Jan Sokol
12 Palmerini et al., ‘Guide- OBSERVATIONS lines on Regulating Ro- botics’ (September 2014) The Regulation workshop observes the following:
48 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
15 German federal law 2. The spread of digital technologies has traditionally been slow in gov- requires doctors to keep physical versions ernment and in highly regulated industries, preventing integration with of contracts document- the rest of the economy that has already been digitised. Late adoption in ing that their patients have agreed to undergo these industries is primarily due to the distrust in new technologies. In surgeries, as well as any healthcare, EU companies still require doctors to store documents physi- other medical treatments 15 requiring consent. These cally. In government, paperwork is still an integral part of operations. forms are usually called ‘informed consent’ forms and require additional working forces to be 3. As companies are shifting their IT services to cloud providers, they face handled. a difficult challenge: whilst cloud services are more flexible and cheaper 16 http://www.econ- than conventional local IT networks, cloud providers operate on different omist.com/news/ leaders/21674714-shift- standards of security which are not easily comparable. Moreover, the ing-computer-power- lock-in effect of cloud providers is immense.16 Another potential threat is cloud-brings-many- benefitsbut-dont-ig- the domination of American companies in the cloud market, potentially nore-risks-skys-lim- creating inefficiencies.17 SMEs are at the greatest risk of vulnerability, it?zid=291&ah=906e69 ad01d2ee51960100b- since they often don’t have capacities and expertise to make informed 7fa502595 decisions and secure their data. 17 https://www.fabasoft. com/de/group/news- room/united-clouds-of- POLICY VISION europe/europas-letz- te-chance-wie-die-dig- The Regulation workshop envisions the following: italisierung-den-konti- nent 1. To ensure safety and to preserve fundamental rights while fostering innovation and new technology take-up by businesses and consumers, we need a way to certify the quality and compliance of new systems with certain values and standards. We propose the creation of a Fundamental Rights certification label, named ‘Ethica’, similar to labels used to certify organic produce or environmentally compliant cars and appliances. The label would be awarded to systems that are to be commercialised to com- panies, governments, and individual consumers, when they can demon- strate compliance with agreed-upon privacy and non-discrimination standards (to start with). It would be awarded by an independent, techni- cal standard-setting pan-European body (and international equivalent in the future), composed of data scientists who can evaluate the technical implications of the systems, professionals of the target industries who can assess the impact on business activities, and representatives of the civil society who, based on advice provided by the former, can ensure that the system does not violate fundamental rights. The accreditation would
49 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
18 Which we know are be based on a ‘code of conduct’ formed of standards that show that the based on various factors related to a client’s level system goes beyond mere compliance with existing regulation. For exam- of ‘risk’, and with the ple, to ensure protection of the right to non-discrimination (Article 21 advent of AI and Big Data will be ever more refined EU Charter of Fundamental Rights), the label would not accept decisions and include factors which based on indirect discrimination through cross-referencing and re-use of for reasons of non-dis- crimination and privacy data. To protect the right to privacy (Article 7 EU Charter of Fundamental should not be taken into Rights), the label would not accept pre-emption of behaviour through account. profiling, and would require both the preservation of autonomy in online purchasing (e.g. no autocomplete) and that data re-use does not de-ano- nymize data. The advantages of such a system are:
• It preserves flexibility and innovation—the system would work as an opt-in system. It does not prevent non-compliant systems from being commercialized or deployed. It only means that until they acquire the label, they are not endowed with the same legitimacy in the eyes of consumers or businesses looking to automate their activities. We therefore believe that it is a great alternative to mandatory regulation, which is often perceived by businesses as a burden on innovation and as a barrier to entry, especially for novel innovative systems.
• It provides an incentive for developers to create quality and responsi- ble systems, and thereby incentivises their take-up by businesses—if a business is scouting the market for a system or algorithm to ratio- nalize its activities, it will be inclined to choose a labelled system because it guarantees that the system and the results it yields will be compliant with certain legal requirements or standards of conduct. Most systems are not tested before they are commercialised, and therefore may turn out to fall foul of those standards. For example, if an insurance company wants to acquire a system that rationalizes decision-making for setting insurance premiums,18 a labelled system assures that they will not be sued for bias or discrimination in their activities. Similarly in the individual users market, it incentivises take-up by hesitant consumers, by assuring them of the quality and safety of the (often expensive) systems they are investing in.
50 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
19 European Union’s Direc- The label would apply to the following industries: torate General for Com- munications Networks, Content and Technology • Private individuals: e.g. home automation systems, smart cars 20 AI Transparency research here refers to developing software tools predicting • Business consumers: e.g. insurance companies, banks, cloud ser- the decisions taken by vices, online purchasing platforms, recruitment services an AI system in different situations. For a recent example of such a tool, • Government: e.g. healthcare, online justice, education—we mandate see Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. that ‘Ethica’ be required for artificial intelligence systems used in the (2016). “ Why Should I government, and possibly also in industries like the healthcare sector Trust You?”: Explaining the Predictions of Any and the insurance industry, which carry a greater public responsibility Classifier. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.04938. towards fundamental rights protection.
21 https://ec.europa.eu/ digital-single-market/ future-emerging-tech- 2. Reducing uncertainty about AI decisions would increase confidence of nologies-fet both developers and users in AI-empowered products. Also, by enabling 22 https://careers.state.gov/ fully informed liability allocation and greater trust in the whole industry work/fellowships/vfp developing these products, making AI decisions more predictable is a public good. We therefore recommend that the European Union’s DG CONNECT19 provides funds to the nascent field ofAI Transparency research20 through its Future & Emerging Technologies’ ideas incuba- tor,21 in collaboration with OpenAI and Partnership on AI. There already exist some research teams working on the issue, so that EU-funded conferences, calls for papers and contests for private developers would be the most effective way to stimulate this research community’s efforts and to spur innovation by linking it with the private sector.
3. One way to address the lack of trust in new technologies in government and in highly regulated industries is by building a more transparent procurement process. Publicizing the rules and regulations that govern privacy and security issues in the procurement process could increase confidence in the tools that are newly adopted. Another way to increase trust is through building a more digital-friendly culture in government. Hiring tech-savvy government employees into different offices in the government, subsidising similar initiatives in healthcare and education, and implementing fellowship programs such as VFP (Virtual Fellows Program)22 would expedite the cultural shift in such fields.
51 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
23 https://ec.europa.eu/ 4. Standardising data formats and promoting security standards has long digital-single-market/en/ 23 cloud#Article been proposed and should be deepened. To put this in practice and ensure competitiveness, we recommend a switch-guarantee: A body of industry representatives, representing small, medium and large cloud computing providers to an equal extent, should be given competence to set up and continuously adapt a system to enable customers to easily and costlessly switch between cloud providers. Users should have a right to switch under the industry-negotiated conditions.
PARTICIPANTS’ STRATEGY The Regulation workshop would like to implement the following initiatives:
1. In order to refine and publicize our proposals on labellingAI systems and on funding AI Transparency research, we would like to engage a dialogue with relevant institutions, such as:
• DG CONNECT, the Joint Research Center, DG Research & Innovation—notably, we will spark a discussion through DG CONNECT’s ICT4Society platform, and the Community of Practice for better self- and co-regulation
• Research Executive Agency, European Research Council Executive Agency
• The European Parliament Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) Working Group on Robotics and Artificial Intelligence
• The European Parliament Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) Working Group on the Digital Single Market
• FET Proactive—we would like to encourage the submission of a research project on AI transparency under the ‘Emerging Themes and Communities’ initiative
52 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
2. We would like to discuss with ARTEMIS the possibility to include projects aimed at the public sector, or to encourage public-private collaborations, in order to unlock the potential for the public sector to benefit from private research and investment.
3. As founders and members of European Horizons chapters in Europe, we will organize local events discussing these proposals and the issue of regulation for emerging technologies and innovation in general with the student community, with the aim to raise awareness and generate other proposals. We believe the discussion around regulation can greatly benefit from diverse inputs, as it must incorporate very diverse interests and perspectives.
53 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
III. Towards a Transatlantic Single Digital Market
TOPIC Currently, the digital economy has limited presence in the TTIP nego- tiations, despite accounting for a large part of transatlantic trade. Why is a digital economy chapter essential for the TTIP negotiations? Furthermore, with the EU Single Digital Market adopted and in full speed, what are the synergies around our digital markets and how can we make them more productive and efficient?
PHOTO CREDIT
Margret Morris
54 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
POLICY PAPERS
TOPIC Overcoming Political Blockage to a TSDM
AUTHORED BY Kyle Daugherty, Gabriel Davis, Lucas Feuser, and Brady Stimpson
This paper is meant to address a transatlantic single digital market (TSDM—a project that seems increasingly hard to imagine within Europe alone. The European project and its defenders are no longer trying to fight the underlying rumbling and tectonic shifts which result from the rise of eurosceptic parties, Brexit and Trump’s victory, but are scrambling to keep alive what they can on the shifting lands beneath their feet. Is it globaliza- tion? This term encompasses so much (culture, politics, trade, ideology) and using it as a sort of compass seems to guide one no where. Has the world become globalized too quickly and at too great of a magnitude, such that people’s innate resistance to change has resorted them to fear and anger? Or perhaps the immense change in the labor market is the cause.
24 Panel discussion Supporters of the single digital market respond to concerns on unemploy- (Ana Perdigao) ment with the claim that 2.5 jobs will be created for every job lost due to digitization.24 Yet, the people who are losing their jobs to automation, out- sourcing, and digitization are often not the same people being employed as the software and hardware engineers realizing this change; nor is education exactly the solution. Perhaps the people too old to learn a new trade are simply victims to creative destruction—an unfortunate yet unstoppable con- sequence of capitalism. For some workers, re-education is impossible. Some companies are unwilling to invest in new, digital training. No one wants to hear this. On a macro-scale, it is easy to lose sight of the humanity behind statistics, yet that humanity is still very alive and very afraid.
To make these complex issues regarding TSDM approachable we have con- densed them into three main barriers that are preventing the realization of a single transatlantic digital market. National sovereignty, labor markets, and
55 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
25 Jean-Claude Trichet national security are the three driving forces that are causing concern among panel many in Europe. However, we believe these barriers can be overcome and the 26 http://institute.eib. benefits of theTSDM realized, through the following policies. org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/01/ Digital-Sovereignty-Eu- rope-at-a-Crossroads.pdf Those who support the European Project are hesitant to call this an existen- tial crisis, just as the heads of the central banks during the financial crisis did not want to alert the public that it could have turned into the Great Depression in a matter of days.25 Still, the future of the European Union and in turn this digital single market are facing a very real crisis. We want to see this market come to fruition, but any possible solution is quickly brushed off as unrealistic. Our paper is meant to offer solutions. Let this introduce the box in which we are placed--hopefully this paper can provoke you to think beyond current limitations.
National Sovereignty
The term sovereignty can be defined as “the capacity to determine one’s own actions and norms.”26 In the context of the European Union and its member states, the debate around authority is thought of as a clash between a supra- national entity and a national one. It is a matter of who will be able to shape the future in Europe. Yet sovereignty is not a mutually exclusive concept that can only be wielded by one. It can be a shared understanding that everyone has the capacity to change the world. That understanding is most evident in the philosophy of the Internet of Things and the digital world. In relation to the Transatlantic Digital Single Market (TSDM), without proper coordination and collective decision-making the market cannot truly develop to its full potential and lead the world economy into a new age. Unfortunately, bring- ing the diverse needs of EU and US states together into one digital market presents significant, conflict-causing political blockage.
The largest concern for nation states and the foundation of their entire resistance is the realization that without one overarching legal framework, one single market will not be able to exist, or at least not as efficiently as it should. Issues such as cross-border contract rules, cross-border parcel deliv- ery costs, copyright reform, and establishing a European innovation culture are all pressing and contentious.
56 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
27 http://www.atlantic- Policy makers need to ensure that all states´ interests are considered. One council.org/images/ publications/Building_a_ possibility would be forming a diverse US-EU digital council to design the Transatlantic_Digital_ TSDM and creating a bicameral, multi-stakeholder system of governance Marketplace_web_0406. pdf; Pg 34, step 18 over the new market. The pooled-sovereignty between the US and EU actu- ally gives smaller states more sovereignty over the Digital Market than they 28 http://ec.europa.eu/ 27 priorities/digital-sin- have currently. The ability for countries, both large and small, to cede gle-market_en parts of their sovereignty in this sense is essential if the market is to develop into a globally homologous and prosperous aspect of world economics. Furthermore, it cannot be understated the amount of economic pressure American digital companies have on the European and global market. To put the United States and Europe in a single market with a single legal frame- work makes the market more fair for Europeans and allows them greater opportunity to compete. It would also be beneficial for the United States as it makes European markets more accessible in terms of regulation and lowers the cost of selling products overseas.
Labor Markets
Another significant source of political blockage to aTSDM is the desire to decrease unemployment rates. Many EU nations are understandably reluctant to support the digital market because they fear that their already underem- ployed economies would lose many skilled workers to larger tech firms in the US, the UK and Germany. Furthermore even in the United States, a single digital market across its various states, there exists concentrated hubs for the digital economy, most notably Silicon Valley and Boston. Many member states on the EU are also concerned that Berlin and London would reap a majority of the benefits and act as the hub for all European digital industry. However, if the digital market is framed in a startup friendly way, skilled laborers from smaller member states would have incentive to create jobs in their own countries.
Doing away with forced localization by creating a single, interoperable digital space for trading data, goods and services would promote a startup culture that could potentially create “825,000 ICT jobs in the EU by 2020.”28 These jobs can be shared proportionally among EU member states if this digital space is governed based on a bicameral, multi-stakeholder model, thereby giving individual nations and states the ability to implement policies
57 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
29 http://www.techrepublic. tailored to their specific economic needs. Improving national incentives com/blog/five-apps/ from-angry-birds-to- and accessibility to tech-related internships and vocational training as nokia-castaways-fin- well as offering local start up grants would help smaller states maintain lands-startup-scene-has- huge-ambitions/ skilled laborers. Such incentives and grants, which nations like Finland and Estonia have implemented quite successfully,29 have increased proficiency in tech-related skills and helped to keep these skilled laborers in the coun- try--creating several new tech-related businesses, thousands of jobs, and billions of euros in revenue. Implementing such policies would help EU nations to maintain or even increase employment rates in a TSDM.
TOPIC Cohesion in User and Contributor Protections for User Driven Digital Platforms Towards a Transatlantic Digital Single Market
AUTHORED BY Ihab Amro, Jan Ertl, Margret Morris, and Lina Zdruli
Introduction
Recognizing the diverse methods in which user-driven digital platforms (“platforms”) have taken broken economies and created a far reaching mar- ket for the every(wo)man, these structures have some inherent difficulties both in the United States and in the European Union. The creation of a dig- ital single market will require serious consideration of how these platforms operate, and how they operate with respect to the governing ordinances in each geographic area.
For the purposes of this paper, we will separately discuss platforms which support the service industries and platforms which distribute digital content. These categories do not provide an exhaustive view of platforms or their use, and we acknowledge the difficulty in parsing a platform into a single category, however, this delineation will allow us to discuss the concerns of platforms frequently used by the general consumer.
58 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
A large concern over these platforms is the creation of big data and the use and exploitation of collected data of people including demographic infor- mation, personal information, and surveillance information. While we feel strongly that these are areas for deep discussion in connection with plat- forms, we will leave our colleagues to the discourse on cybersecurity.
Challenge
The challenge we will address is that while regulation makes platform use safe for users, regulation often makes innovation and monetization on startup platforms difficult. In addition, there are often differing opinions on the philosophy of regulation from one nation to another. Speaking first to the concerns on service platforms, this is an area where real transatlantic cooperation is feasible and desired on both sides. The use of the platforms by professional establishments creates a competition problem both on the platform itself and in the overall market. While larger platforms have the resources to adapt to different market environments, startups that require volume to profit do not. The challenge is a lack of unified consumer protec- tion that serves citizens of all states at a low entry cost for smaller platforms with regard to Business to Consumer (‘B2C’) e-commerce transactions in both Europe and the United States.
Proposed Solution
We recognize that citizens and business entities enjoy the rights provided them in their own territories and recognize that every community cannot be served by the same mandates. However, some protection should be standard in all locations (“basic protection”) against illegal use and use that violates the rights dictated in international law. It is proposed that a suc- cessful transatlantic market for service platforms will flourish if the service platform is permitted a period of growth with limited regulation. This period of growth will be defined in terms of a threshold of users. The transition out of the sunrise phase will occur one year after the threshold is achieved, and will be designated by an insignia included on the platform. Thus the startup platform is permitted to operate as a pass through entity with purchases protected as a consumer to consumer (“C2C”) transaction during a sunrise
59 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
period. The exception to this shift would be where the platform is knowingly involved in creating or promoting illegal activities or activities that deny the user of its civil liberties. The burden of liability shall remain with the users, until the platform reaches a certain threshold of users. This threshold will then transfer and levy the burden of protection to the platform itself as in a B2C arrangement. Preference to the application of law will follow the protec- tions of the registration state or citizenship of the breached party.
Analysis
Problems: Consumer to Consumer liability can be difficult to enforce if identity is concealed by screen names through the platform. Therefore, even though the platform holds no transactional liability in the sunrise period, the platform will have a responsibility to collect and verify identifying data for use in dispute resolutions. We recommend the implementation of the option of online dispute resolution mechanisms for ease of the consumer. This would avoid unnecessary traffic in courts and lower court costs for the users.
Results: By shifting the view of the service platform to that of a pass through entity and leaving the liability between users during the sunrise period, the platform is given room to grow and provides a low entry cost, encouraging competition. In addition, by setting a threshold at which point the platform holds liability discourages monopoly behavior. On jurisdiction, deference to the territory of the breached party increases the user’s likelihood of legal awareness and affords them the protections they have come to expect. This also allows the state to feel as though their citizens are adequately protected. In addition, the larger platforms will be encouraged to grow and adhere to safety regulations required of established entities as their adherence will encourage consumer loyalty due to the additional protection afforded through the liability shift to a B2C relationship.
60 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Challenge
As to the platforms involved in the distribution of digital content protected under intellectual property laws, finding common ground on a transatlantic market is more difficult. Media content heavily influences culture, expres- sion, and reflects local traditions of freedoms and ideologies. Therefore, they are carefully protected and exploited differently in each territory. The broad- cast of illicit content and content that inspires violence is also a concern. Answers to liability, enforcement, and dispute jurisdiction are unclear.
Content—be it images, music, film, or writings—while afforded different rights based upon the broadcast or penetration of that content, are governed not just by territorial jurisdiction and protections, but the underlying trade agreements outlining the limits to their use by the rights holder in a specific territorial market. These issues of territorial rights with regard to content, make a single digital market difficult, as some of the content is not available in all territories.
Currently, the artists and their representatives are responsible for the iden- tification and prosecution of any breach of intellectual property rights, while platforms are simply under pressure to have these materials removed only if identified by the rights holder. Currently, the contributors do not bear pun- ishment for posting or profiting from breached content on these platforms.
Solution
Unlike service platforms, content platforms are not as dependent on critical mass. Where they profit on each subscription to content, click-ad or ad paired with content, the sunrise period on regulation described above is not necessary. What is necessary to encourage platform and competition growth, is authorization for a hold on royalty distribution until a value is met in sales by the contributor’s content. Thus, the threshold should be based on earn- ings on each subscriber and use, not earnings only after a certain threshold of subscribers is met. In addition, where content is low earning, a failure to meet the threshold after a 5-year period should automatically trigger release of the accrued earnings to the content contributor.
61 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
In order for contributors to be able to adequately seek remedies in cases of breach, platforms should be responsible for both adequate identifications of users and cooperation in disputes. It is recommended that these platforms also provide the option of mechanisms for C2C online dispute resolution, with the intellectual property laws of the territories in which the material is registered prevailing with deference to applicable international law. In situa- tions where the platform has failed to acquire the content user’s identifying information and points of access, the platform becomes liable for the remedy of any breach.
Given the prevalence of monitoring and identifying software, the platform should be held liable as the first line of defense on reporting illicit materials, particularly in the case of pornography, as the platform is largely the monetary benefactor. The ultimate criminal liability, however, should lie with the contrib- utor of the content, whether contributed through authorized use or breach.
Toward a single digital market, as content reception is subject to cultural and territorial norms, we would not require changes to the underlying trade agreements on content, but rather encourage coordination of these agree- ments to work toward larger distribution in the territories ascribed hereto. This is likely to be a natural market event as a larger territory means larger revenues, although we understand language and cultural preferences to be a natural barrier to this event.
Analysis
Problems: The results of this solution toward a Single Digital Market will come over time and will not be instantaneous with regard to creating a unified set of protected rights and towards content that is available as a single digital market. As the environment is inevitable to evolve, the legal framework must be afforded space for flexibility and adaptation to move with the changing market conditions.
Results: The respect of contributor rights will be an immediate benefit to contributors of content that does not have the popular acclaim of a viral video, however, but does have educational or other valuable cultural
62 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
contributions. This will encourage the effort into these smaller audience projects, given that they will elicit a royalty, even if they do not crest the cur- rent million subscriber threshold. The resolution of C2C or B2C e-commerce transaction disputes through online dispute resolution techniques may ease the cost of IP protection for the everyday contributor and also encourage sharing more prized works in an open market. As platforms move toward increasing the use and efficacy of online dispute resolution techniques, the underlying goal of the creation of a unified international legal framework for protection of contributor and consumers will come to fruition all while promoting the idea of a single digital market.
TOPIC Simulation Recap and Lessons
AUTHORED BY Daniel Carballal and Elsa Rebentisch
This simulation was designed to foster the experience of cooperating in discussing ideas about the EU and Silicon Valley in terms of their relationship and joint objectives. Our goal was to help the participants to understand the divisions and commonalities between the two. Using principles of game theory, each team was given three distinct but interlinked objectives; one of these goals was shared, another was possible only through cooperation, and the last was achieved through selfishness. The participants were given a series of situations and encouraged to employ various methods to achieve their goals—cooperation, bargaining, lying, deception, and trading. We hoped that they would examine and relate the situations that we gave them to the current climate of negotiations between the European Commission and the tech community.
As we proceeded with the simulation, the participants readily and aggres- sively embraced their new goals and identities—something that was not exhibited in the previous four hours of sombre discussion. This is not to say that the relaxed atmosphere concluded the scholarship which was the goal of the conference; rather, it provided a concrete dimension to an otherwise
63 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
abstract conversation. Participants whom had been discussing about the need for understanding and communication were the quickest to resort to lying and cheating in the simulation. We encouraged them to embrace princi- ples of diplomacy to mutually work together, and although this did not always go perfectly, they came out of the simulation with a better understanding of the challenges facing this relationship. One participant commented that they better understood the similarities that exist between the two, and even that the similarities outweighed the differences. Other participants had similar opinions, sharing that they were glad that even in competition there could be room for cooperation, and feeling more sympathetic to those who are respon- sible for making these negotiations in the real world.
Our major takeaways from this were that even in times of competition and conflict, there is room for cooperation and compromise. Even in situations where the stakes were low, people took readily to the spirit of competition and tried to outsmart the other team or coerce them into conditions that were favourable to them. Our recommendation to DEYS participants and diplomats in general is to focus on similar goals, and actively communicate their more conflicting desires. This way, the spirit of competition can be subdued by the superior will of compromise. As well, we noticed that the teams got better results in the simulation when they worked together and compromised. After some encouragement, a diplomatic system of sorts was formed in which com- promises and arrangements were made that led to significantly better results than before, when they worked strictly against each other. In economic terms, this can be boiled down to the concept of trade—in this case this phenome- non was represented through actions that could be used as bargaining chips; the teams had actions that did not benefit them but were desirable to the other team, forcing them to negotiate for more favorable terms.
Even in this highly abstracted intellectual exercise, there was a certain satisfaction in seeing the future diplomats and leaders of our institutions grapple with the destructive nature of diplomacy. None of the issues had easy answers: endless dissertations could be written and ceaseless discus- sions had, but the hunger for an answer will always remain unfulfilled, as they were designed to be matters in which there is no simple answer to be had. Yesterday’s participants are tomorrow’s statesmen who will set policy
64 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
of substantial consequence, with the seeming innocence of the simulation “game” will be replaced by the veracity and tensions of reality. And while both teams “failed” in some regard yesterday, history demands of us to be more refined and upstanding, to listen more contemplatively, to supplant argument with discussion, lest we lose the progress of the last seventy years.
TOPIC How to build a Transatlantic Cyber Security Union as a prelude to a Transatlantic Single Digital Market (TSDM)
AUTHORED BY Philipp Hackel and Eoghan Hughes
Opportunity
The EU and US are aiming to be the digital hub in the world, which would enable them to set the direction of the global digital agenda. This means that they could expand their control over digital output worldwide as well as advocate for a freer society, which in turns aids their position in the world as open market societies as well as supporting central cultural concepts such as freedom of speech, opinion and education. However, with this position comes insecurity. As the main processors of data globally, both public and private information, European States (both EU and Non-EU) and the US are at risk of cyber-attacks aimed at acquiring information or disrupting essential state apparatuses. With recent cyber-attacks on the Democratic party of the US, linked to Russia, and other attacks linked to China and North Korea, as well as fears in Germany of potential cyber-attacks aimed at influencing next year’s federal elections, European States and theUS must find an adequate response and should seize on their key strengths vis-à-vis the BRICS: relatively high levels of education, deep digital infrastructure, technological knowhow and a liberal market. To this end the Transatlantic community should forge a Cyber-Security Union, as a separate entity, [simi- lar in structure and composition to NATO with the focus of the EU’s European
65 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Cybercrime Centre (EC3)], where resources, expertise and competences to combat cyber-threats in the member states should be combatted.
Challenges
Several factors stand in the way of the organisation of this cyber-security union; These are:
1. Edward Snowden’s leaking of NSA data revealed the massive surveillance operations conducted by the US on European allies, and has understand- ably caused issues of public distrust.
2. Common agreement will be difficult to achieve in terms of assuaging fears of nation states as regards their sovereignty and bringing in those states who have thus far avoided any type of common security organisa- tion (Ireland, Switzerland).
Policy Proposal
A Cyber-Security Union (CSU) should be formed with a focus on the pooling of resources in combatting transatlantic cybercrime and potential cyberter- rorism, the brining together of experts under a joint command and the joint funding of the development of cyber security infrastructures. The CSU must:
1. Bring together at a localised HQ, national representatives from every member of the CSU for quarterly meetings.
a. These representatives must be chosen either by the ministries of defence or competent executives in each member state. These repre- sentatives will be charged with the executive functioning of the CSU, directing its resources, appointing experts and approving policy.
b. One of their number will be elected President of the organisation and will be located at the HQ for a term of six years.
66 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
c. National representatives are chosen either by the ministry of defence or any similar government institution. The duration of service of each representative will be determined by the same appointing body.
2. For the sake of being able to fund the maintenance of and any actions taken by the body, a special fund, managed by a carefully selected finan- cial body, must be installed. Member states will be obliged to pay annual membership fees into this separate fund. This fund will be used to pay experts, fund developments in digital technology and infrastructure, fostering cyber security of member states, and to pay all the necessary staff of the HQ.
a. The member state contribution should be calculated as a small per- centage of the GDP of the state.
b. Contributions may be substituted for greater contributions in terms of staff, equipment or other services rendered. This must be preap- proved by the governing council.
3. Common cyber defence mechanisms to counter hacking in any member state will be a central aspect of this union. This will involve a solidarity principle, which will see a country which has suffered a cyberattack (deemed to be at the level of cyberterrorism or “hybrid warfare”) receive any support necessary from Member States in responding to this attack- be that financial, logistical or political.
4. In order to gain democratic stability, the proposed CSU must act on previously agreed-upon laws. These laws will be written down in statutes that must be agreed to by every new member state. In order to prevent any threat to other member states, failing to follow these statutes must result in an exclusion from the CSU:
a. The best format for these laws would be in a treaty, agreed upon by founding members, with the option to accede to its principles at a later date, for those states unable to join at the inauguration of the CSU.
b. States wishing to join the CSU must commit to contributing their fair share to the budget.
67 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
c. States wishing to join must meet the criteria set out in the treaty.
d. States wishing to join are not required to be members of the EU. Non-EU states in Europe that meet the treaty criteria are all accept- able, upon unanimous approval of Member States.
5. Separate Experts will be appointed for the:
a. Legal aspects of the CSU.
b. The digital aspects of the CSU—including so called “white hat” hack- ers and digital infrastructure experts. c. Defence experts with a focus on cyberterrorism and “hybrid warfare.”
6. To ensure that the CSU remains at the cutting edge of cyber security technology, some of the fund shall be used to hire consultants from top firms involved in digital innovation.
a. These outside experts must pass rigorous scrutiny in the form of back- ground checks and vetting. They will only be accepted in this consul- tancy role upon the signing of a legally binding agreement to secrecy.
b. Only firms and staff from a member state may be involved in this consultancy.
7. The CSU has the authority to set up units responsible for responding to different cyber threats such as:
a. A unit dedicated to attacks on state based cyber infrastructure; b. A unit dedicated to countering information warfare. c. A unit responsible for developing cyber counter-offensive strategies. d. A unit responsible for the development of better cyber security regulations.
68 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Analysis
Public distrust, fostered by the recent NSA scandal, can result in tensions between European states and the US. These tensions could be fostered after the US presidential elections, after which European leaders have publicly declared their scepticism of further cooperation. Thus, special attention must be given to this matter.
Furthermore, a CSU would result in the collection of great amounts of data. In times of cyber wars, the data stored by a CSU must be protected by the best means possible. Hence, in order to minimize the threat of a data leak, the statutes must ensure that employees and representatives, as well as experts, only know relevant information needed for their decisions. In addi- tion, a cyber security apparatus needs to be installed with the aim of protect- ing a CSU database from hacker attacks.
TOPIC The redistributive consequences of a TSDM to increase the competitiveness of European SMEs
AUTHORED BY Ariane Aumaitre and Elin Waldenström
Challenge
The world economy is going through a digitalisation process. This process is changing people’s life, affecting both production and consumption patterns. Digitalisation is bringing new opportunities and benefits to our day-to-day routines, but it is also creating new challenges that have to be faced. As any revolution in economic history, digitalisation, together with the increasing globalisation of the world economy is creating winners and losers. Our aim with this proposal is to identify who these winners and losers would be in the context of the creation of a Transatlantic Digital Single Market, and to try to find a way to minimise the negative effects faced by the losers.
69 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
The creation of a Transatlantic Digital Single Market (TDSM) is likely to increase the welfare and opportunities of consumers, who will have access to a bigger, better regulated market, with mechanisms for data protection and security and lower prices of deliveries. It will also entail benefits for those companies at both sides of the Atlantic with higher levels of digitalisation and productivity. But not everyone will gain from a TSDM: less digitalised and competitive producers will have difficulties surviving in an environment with even higher competition.
Existent data show that European companies are lagging behind their US competitors both in productivity and digitalisation. Europe has experienced a slower productivity growth than the United States for the last two decades, while US productivity increased 2% annually during the period 1995-2013, European productivity increased only by 1%. This development has broad- ened the productivity gap. The average productivity of the EU-28 was in 2013 only 74% of the US productivity.
One of the main reasons behind the productivity gap is that US enterprises have been better at embracing digitalisation and investing in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) than their European counterparts. EU investment in ICTs was 80% of the investment in the US in 2000, but in 2011 this percentage had decreased to only 57%. The beneficial effects of ICTs on productivity have been largely shown in multiple sectors of the economy. Data shows that while ICT capital contributed with a 0.53% to the average annual GDP growth in the US, this percentage was only 0.32% in France and 0.27% in Germany. Small enterprises that expand online have twice the chance of survival than their offline counterparts.
Given the advantages of embracing ICTs to increase competitiveness and reduce the productivity gap between European and US companies, this policy proposal will focus on promoting increased digitisation of European companies by increasing their use of ICTs. Considering that big companies have the resources to consult the expertise necessary to face this challenge by themselves, the proposal will focus on helping Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) to undertake a digitalisation process which will make them better prepared for competing with their US counterparts in the TSDM.
70 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Although online shopping has begun to conquer shopping as we used to know it, shopping away from keyboard has not lost all of it’s charm. Visiting actual stores provides customers with experiences: an added value that can’t be obtained through the computer. This means that offline enterprises could attract more customers and compete with online alternatives by improving and reshaping the experience of visiting their store.
Solution Part One
Our proposal aims to provide guidance and expertise to European SMEs in order to increase their competitiveness and productivity. This will be achieved through an education and training program for SMEs, to help them adapt to the digital economy and the new demands of consumers. The edu- cation program will focus on digitisation and ways of reaching consumers by exploiting existing structures of online retail platforms, such as Amazon or Ebay. Special emphasis will be put on guidance in the use of ICTs throughout different sectors.
The program shall be tried out during a year on a test-group of enterprises. A follow-up by an extensive evaluation shall ensure that the education pro- gram is of high quality and lead to the aimed results.
A first step will be training a group of consultants, familiar with program- ming and the use of ICTs in the digital challenges that face SMEs. These ITC- trained experts, whose education will be sponsored and formed by the EU, shall then be sent out as external consultants. SMEs will be able to hire them temporarily, to help them make better use of online platforms, make use of instruments for customer targeting, and develop strategies for their use of ITCs such as making a better use of websites and online payment services.
As mentioned, the competitiveness of offline firms, imagine for instance a small book shop or local shoemaker, is not only based on their level of digitalisation, but also by the experience they provide their customers. Therefore the digital consultants shall also be prepared to provide guidance on how companies create added value for their businesses by improving their
71 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
individuality and providing experience, and give knowledge on how small enterprises may adapt their products to the new characteristics of demand.
Solution Part Two
The second part of the proposal consists of e-learning programs, conferences and workshops targeted at the sharing of best practices on the use of ICTs and digital economy. These events should be organised under a EU umbrella but helped by local and regional administrations. This would provide SMEs with the possibility to meet similar companies and discuss common issues and solutions. These activities will raise awareness and increase the interest to invest an effective digital content and technology.
The sharing of best practices may raise concerns, since some of the partici- pants will be competitors. However, the differentiation in products, as well
as different geographical locations, will make it possible for companies to benefit from these exchanges.
Analysis
This policy proposal targets the presented challenge by focusing on the roots of the problem: the lower use of ITC’s in Europe, which lead to a productivity gap between EU and US companies. The proposal aims to minimise the losses for European companies that could arise in case of a TDMS. By finding a way to increase the competitiveness of European SMEs, the proposal pro- vides a way of keeping the gains of a TSDM for consumers, while minimising the negative impact on the “losers”.
The proposal will provide the service sector with digital instruments and help individual enterprises increase the added value of their products, as well as their productivity and revenue. The combination of consultants expertise with the exchange of first-hand best practices will give an unique added value for European SMEs aiming at raising their competitiveness.
72 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
The fact that the program is based on training and expertise, ensure that the resources will be allocated in the digital investments needed for an increased European competitiveness. This way we avoid the risks that come with a subsidies-based program. The digital consultants trained by the EU will form a homogenous group that all have the equal standards, measures and knowl- edge for targeting the challenges faced by small and middle sized companies in the EU.
30 Protecting and Promoting TOPIC the Open Internet, Report & Order on Remand, Declara- tory Ruling, and Order, GN Protecting Net Neutrality in the Transatlantic Docket No 14-28 FCC. Washington, D.C (2015) Digital Market (TSDM) for US Legislation on Net Neutrality. Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament AUTHORED BY and of the Council of 25 Danial Alam, LoMaría del Mar Antón Martínez, and Kendra Nicole Pengelly November 2015 laying down measures concern- ing open internet access and amending Directive Why is Net Neutrality an Important Challenge in the TSDM? 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electron- ic communications Net Neutrality is the principle that internet traffic should be treated equally networks and services and Regulation (EU) No and free from any discrimination such as blocking, throttling and paid prior- 531/2012 on roaming on itization. It protects citizens’ rights and free competition, but also promotes public mobile communi- 30 cations networks within innovation, free expression, and infrastructure development. the Union. (2015).
31 FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler stated in April Key Differences Between EU and US Legislation 29th 2014 that “Providing exclusive, prioritized service to an affiliate is not commercially The EU and US regulations on Net Neutrality are similar in many areas. reasonable. For instance, They prevent blocking and throttling, and have measures to promote trans- a broadband provider that also owns a sports parency in ISPs. Neither policy differentiates between fixed and mobile broad- network should not be band services. However, the EU and the US differ in their approach to paid able to give a commercial advantage to that net- prioritisation and their definitions of ‘reasonable traffic management’. Whilst work over another com- petitive sports network the US allows for traffic management for non-competitive purposes, the wishing to reach viewers BEREC guidelines on EU 2015/2120 allow for ‘zero-rating policies’ on a case by over the Internet.” Available at: https://www. case basis. Zero-rating policies allow for an ISP to offer ‘free internet’ to users fcc.gov/news-events/ from a particular Content Application Provider (CAP) such as Facebook.31 This blog/2014/04/29/finding- best-path-forward- creates artificial barriers to entry for competing content providers. protect-open-internet
73 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
32 http://www.reuters.com/ Concerns article/us-usa-trump-fcc- idUSKBN13H02B 1. Political Context: Whilst both EU and US Regulators have relatively similar policies and goals towards Net Neutrality, there are concerns that a Republican-led US administration may alter and repeal current FCC Net Neutrality legislation.32
2. ‘Search Neutrality’: Much of the Net Neutrality debate has been heavily focused on regulating ISPs, there are concerns that the regulation of Content Application Providers (CAP) has been neglected, especially regarding ‘Search Neutrality’.
3. Market Differences: There are fragmented markets between Member States within the EU. Furthermore, the EU and the US have significant market differences due to increased concentration in the US telecoms industry.
4. Future Proofing Regulation: As we cannot predict the future needs and uses of the internet, it is recognised that a strict regulatory approach can be a barrier to investments in new technologies, such as the Internet of Things (IoT) and innovation within healthcare fields.
Policy Recommendation
The FCC decision to classify the Internet as a public utility is crucial con- sidering the expanding roles of Internet, and the role of the government in protecting Internet access for future generations. To realise full transatlantic coordination and resulting economic growth, the EU should consider a similar classification.
Secondly, the concerns about securing Net Neutrality can be addressed by a Working Group which would meet once each year to discuss emerging tech- nologies and their impact on transatlantic policies. This intergovernmental
74 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Working Group will combine civil society organisations, government offi- cials, and industry actors, including both CAPs such as Google and ISPs such as AT&T.
Building a regular platform for dialogue will ensure that, even as the IoT expands, network neutrality will be preserved throughout changing politi- cal climates. This body would need no formal legislative powers but it will encourage dialogue from all parties involved in the Net Neutrality debate to work together towards a common goal.
PHOTO CREDIT
Margret Morris
75 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
IV. Job Creation in Times of Industry Disruption Workshop
TOPIC How can we manage labor in a way that provides for social peace while meeting the rapidly changing demands of digital markets? With innovation in artificial intelligence, including driverless vehi- cles, drones, service-sector robotics, and other labour-replacing and labour-augmenting technologies, representatives of civil society will need to think about the future role of and return on human labour.
Education: How can our societies educate workers? There have been some successful “digital apprenticeship” programs created. Should there be more? What curricular updates do we need in general schooling?
Labour market in security: How do we manage in security from emerging technologies?
PHOTO CREDIT
Margret Morris
76 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
POLICY PAPERS
TOPIC Achieving Gender Equity in the Digital Economy of the Future
AUTHORED BY Samuel Aggrey and Cora Neudeck
Observations
34 The Future of Jobs The Creating Jobs in Times of Industry Disruption Workshop observes the Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for following: the Fourth Industrial Revolution. (2016). World Economic Forum. [online] Available at: http:// 1. Industries expecting high employment growth such as architecture, 34 www3.weforum.org/docs/ engineering, and computing have low female participation. Our expec- WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf tation is for increasing automation to widen the gender gap. However, we believe that the new era can be utilized to eliminate the gender gap and that the opportunity to work with new and developing technology can provide a unique chance to help women grow and progress throughout complex STEM industries.
a. We recognize that the disparity that exists is not an issue of talent or capability, but rather is deeply rooted in history and previously ingrained ideas about the roles of women. The policies we propose to solve these issues are aimed to removing these established structural barriers in order to empower women to be able to utilize their skills, talents, and capabilities and allow them to achieve their full potential, with specific care being attentive to women of lower socioeconomic backgrounds or marginalized racial minorities.
b. A possible solution (to be further explored below) is the idea to link any subsidisation to female career progression; once women
77 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
35 The Future of Jobs successfully enter STEM markets, industries could report if gov- Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for ernment subsidisation to improve female participation has helped the Fourth Industrial increase the recruitment and career progression of women within Revolution. (2016). World Economic Forum. [online] their corporations. Available at: http:// www3.weforum.org/docs/ WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf [Accessed 12 Nov. 2016]. c. In order to ensure that this idea is continuously implementable, women within these fields must be aligned with opportunities for mentorship and guidance in order to help with both entry into a sec- tor, and career progression as well. This will help to not only increase participation, but also to ensure that women have greater possibilities of senior management roles.
d. The improvement of dialogue between government and business is needed to ensure the effectiveness of this policy.
2. With more women educated at degree-level globally, there is a clear under-utilization of female talent either due to a lack of progression or untapped potential from the onset. It is therefore to the benefit of society as a whole to actively seek to promote future gender parity. Companies also seek to benefit from the diversity of thinking that is to be gained from increased greater gender parity.
3. Statistics from the past decade show that the economic gender gap has only been closed by 3%35 globally and even with the going economic push towards digitization, it is clear that the current measures at use to curb gender inequality are showing low returns. Increasing the disparity in STEM participation between men and women has long been the go-to solution for reducing gender inequality, most especially within the digital economy.
4. It may be considered that the continuing lack of women in senior man- agement roles who are then able to influence workplace culture and as such “normalize” upper-tier female participation is part of the issue at hand. Consequently, we find that increased resources towards carefully studying and tracking female career progression may be effective in conjunction with STEM orientated approaches.
78 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Policy Vision
The Creating Jobs in Times of Industry Disruption Workshop believes that:
1. In order to help increase demand for women within highly competitive STEM industries, it is necessary for the government to fund and imple- ment relevant primary training programs for women within these indus- tries to aid and increase their tangible skills and experience, therefore increasing the number of women in these industries and attempting to equalize their resumes, and thereby allowing them to be promoted to higher positions.
a. These training programs would be supported by government sub- sidies, funded by supplementary fiscal incentives provided to com- panies within the STEM industries that promote diverse hiring and workplace culture processes for women, as detailed in Policy Vision Section 2.
b. These training programs will be designed to encourage skills and experiential learning in order to help remove the barriers preventing women within these industries from being able to recognize and achieve their full potential.
i. Within these trainings, not only will technical skills be taught, but also supplemental “soft” ones as well such as career development, entrepreneurship, and networking, in order to help increase senior female STEM job procurement.
ii. Women will also be encouraged to grow confidence as well, encouraging them to speak their minds, share their thoughts, and feel able in their ability to apply to higher level job positions.
c. These should be paid training programs in order to provide women an incentive to attend, with special care being ensured for employers to receive more funding to outweigh these costs.
79 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
d. In order to ensure that these training programs are having a tangible impact, follow-up data will be collected, composed of:
i. Written evaluations of the facilitator and overall program material by the women that attended the training.
• This will ensure that the programs are effective and adaptable.
ii. A preliminary follow-up study of career positions the women moved to within the following year.
• This will help to see the short-term benefit of these programs.
iii. A long-term study to determine what upper-level management and development positions these women held 10 years later.
• This will serve the purpose of holding STEM companies accountable and ensuring that women are receiving the same amount of job opportunities that correspond to their skills and experience gained due to these programs.
2. In order to assist in ensuring that women are able to gain and advance into powerful management and development positions, we propose a supplementary fiscal incentive offered by the government toSTEM firms. This incentive would encourage employers to seek out and hire women, therefore not only increasing the number of women being able to find jobs within these fields, but also encouraging gender parity overall as well.
a. These subsidies would be funded by diverting the money from the current programs aimed at increasing women in STEM industries that have not been successful in their goals, while also recognizing the successes that have been previously made.
b. In order to calculate these subsidy amounts, annually implemented on United States and European Union STEM companies, companies must provide yearly data reports on the number of women that their
80 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
company has in central research and senior management positions. Using this data, local governments will be able to determine the amount of subsidies to be able to be provided, therefore increasing the core percentage of women being able to find the jobs they want in these fields.
i. Supplemental benefits could be obtained by United States and European Union STEM companies that incorporate women into the consulting, design, and development stages of new technol- ogies and innovative solutions, allowing women to become the innovators, being able to directly engage with the technology that will impact them down the line.
ii. Additionally, STEM companies that actively seek to improve child care and family maternity/paternity leave plans will receive more funding from this fiscal incentive program as well. These compa- nies should also care to properly ensure that men are allocated significant time for these reasons as well, in order to remove the idea that childcare is a primarily woman focused endeavor and encourage greater gender equality.
• Furthering on our assumption of unequal caring responsibil- ities between men and women, through this improvement in labor market flexibility, the digital economy could actually aid and ensure that the career of a person isn’t halted by an inabil- ity to work from maternity/paternity leave.
• Technology (digitally working from home) would be able to ensure that the employers are still able to meet their long-term goals, even while supporting these programs as well.
iii. Intra-industry collaboration could also be of benefit, where industries that have a positive track record for supporting and encouraging diverse workplace culture are able to offer practical ideas and support to companies that are not being able to be as successful.
81 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
3. A separate aspect of this fiscal incentive gender program will affect universities: select universities will also be provided a proportional sub- sidy grant, to be used for the purpose of further helping to incorporate women into the developing STEM workforce.
a. These funds will be used to create and subsidize women’s STEM fellowships, student organizations, and scholarships in order to allow women interested in these industries to develop hard skills, connect with alumni and find mentors in these fields, and gain relevant real world experience in order to progress in their careers later on.
b. Additional focus will be placed on helping women of lower socioeco- nomic backgrounds, marginalized minorities, and older women who are returning to school, who often face deeper structural barriers to entry within these specific job markets.
4. Gender parity is no longer an extended leg issue of public policy, but one at the centre of it. The hope here is that the mechanisms designed by governments to generate economic growth must consciously be aware of the positive or negative impact they will have on gender parity.
Participants’ Strategy
The participants of the Creating Jobs in Times of Industry Disruption Workshop, in order to realize their vision, intend to:
1. Recognize the challenges and concerns with implementing a program such as this, including:
a. Proper regulation of the fiscal incentives given to United States and European Union STEM companies and accurate reporting of women in relevant research or senior management positions.
i. The difficulty in defining a “relevant” research or senior manage- ment position.
82 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
b. Ensuring accurate follow-up data collection.
c. Determining the fiscal incentive rate and the previously existingSTEM programs that should be reduced or incorporated.
2. Explore pathways for universities to gain government funding to subsi- dize grants to implement the STEM women-focused fellowships, student organizations, and scholarships.
3. Create a theoretical fiscal incentive system as detailed in this paper, to be proposed to government leaders with the sincere hopes of implementing such a scale on United States and European Union STEM companies within the next 5 years.
4. Actively seek to promote inclusivity and diversity within our respec- tive university societies and groups across our respective disciplines. Appreciate that the approach in the advertisement of STEM orientated opportunities should seek to become gender neutral.
TOPIC The Future of Health Care & Job Creation Development in the European Union
AUTHORED BY Maryna Nazarian, Maria Belen Mourad Simes, Heather Marina Saenz, and Justyna Smela Wolski
The Creating Jobs in Health Care workshop observes the following:
With the rise of technological advancement in health care in our complex globalized society, there has never been a greater urgency and challenge to create and retain jobs in the health care industry at all levels. Per the United Nations, 1 out of 5 individuals globally will be over the age of 60 by 2050.
83 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
The rise of an aging population is projected to be centered in Europe, North America, and the developed world. In parallel, employment and economic development in all health care sectors are being shaped by new digital tech- nologies from free personalized mobile phone apps to AI-based workforces. Therefore, creating and retaining jobs in health care while supporting the development of these technological advancements is the challenge of the 21st century. The European Union must harmonize its medical health train- ing and education systems, establish frameworks for AI-based workforce liability, and create a health care technology development program to boost widespread job creation in the health care field.
Observations
The Creating Jobs in Health Care workshop believes that:
1. Fitness and health trackers, electronic health cards that can be submitted to one’s doctor online, governmental and corporate led health innovation and research programs are the reality of the 21st century health care system. Approaches to R&D in health care are being reshaped; an exam- ple are Cisco Hyper Innovation Living Labs where organizations unite to create ecosystem innovation, collaborate to develop and then commercial- ize new concepts.Moreover, machines have successfully transplanted artificial organs into human bodies and scientists all over the world are investigating new cures to incurable diseases.
2. Innovation has affected and will continue to affect all sectors of the health care industry such as surgical operations, diagnostics, pharma- ceuticals, and medical research. These innovations will lead to the follow- ing unemployment issues:
a. AI-based workforces and automated systems replacing human health care professionals;
84 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
40 World Investment b. Narrowing employment opportunities in health care, especially for Report, UNCTAD, 2016 low grade-level work;
c. Emerging skills gap as new health care positions will require inter- disciplinary professionals knowledgeable in both medicine and its technological roles.
3. The following sources of employment are currently emerging:
a. Engaging data scientists to work with growing amounts of health care information;
b. Employing engineers and software developers who create and main- tain medical software and hardware;
c. Collaborating and hiring more professors and researchers for the proposed new interdisciplinary education programs.40
Policy Vision
The Creating Jobs in Health care workshop believes in:
1. Taking a further step in the harmonization of the European Higher Education Area to guarantee de facto freedom of movement—one of the four economic freedoms of the European Union—for health care workers.
a. Standardize the duration of the 1st and 2nd cycles for degrees that enable to practice health care professions.
b. Unify entry requirements and curricula for medical degrees consid- ered especially relevant.
c. Create a supranational authority commissioned to supervise the creation of new degrees.
85 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
2. Gathering updated quantitative data on the recruiting needs of employ- ers across Europe and the reality of European curricula is crucial to evalu- ate and counterbalance the skills gap in different health care professions.
a. Conduct yearly research on both topics and spot new competences not covered by European educational institutions.
b. Openly publish the results and advertise them by implementing an intensive communication strategy towards prospective employers.
3. Fostering the already high mobility of European medical professionals through funded traineeships and language courses—on condition that the beneficiaries might be destined afterwards to any country with a shortage of professionals—is imperative to mitigating the uneven figures and ways of accessing the professions across the continent. The courses should be financed and managed by the countries suffering the shortage.
4. Creating a program specially focused on the development of new health care technologies. The existence of such program is essential as it will allow for:
a. Reduced costs in the industry: The development, implementation and widespread use of advanced technologies, such as health care robots or machines able to diagnose simple illnesses and recommend treatments, will create a more cost-effective industry.
b. R&D research: A great number of jobs will be maintained and created by encouraging research and development through the creation of this program focused on health care development. This is mainly due to two things: health care is an industry that still has a lot of growth potential when it comes to developing new treatments, technologies to facilitate procedures and cures to different existing and future new diseases. On the other hand, R&D is an area that requires a strong presence of the human element. Despite the advances in Artificial Intelligence, robots
86 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
41 http://cordis.europa.eu/ will not be able to replace humans when it comes to generating ideas, result/rcn/161246_en.ht- ml and devising ways of implementing them.
The program should incorporate two timely aspects of health care policy:
• Entering the healthcare industry through educational and voca- tional access.
• Establishing a framework and regulations for remote assistance health care services for preventive (heart rate measuring, elec- tronic health cards), therapeutical (diabetes care) and emergency (“life alert”) purposes.
5. Devising a set of laws regulating the use of robots. As mentioned in the Robot Law project, this type of legislation should “strike a careful balance” that will provide risk regulations to ensure the safety of users without discouraging innovation in the area.41 A group of representatives from the robotic technologies development industry and the health industry (especially representing doctors and other health care person- nel), together with legal experts from different member countries should come together to draft a law regarding robots’ regulation and liability laws. This should have the character of a soft law, providing overall guidelines for the member countries. The member countries can later take the guidelines and adapt them to their current legislation to ensure a better reception and implementation of such laws.
6. Moreover, based on the general principle of freedom of choice, a revision should be done to establish that patients should have the right to choose between a human doctor or a machine to perform a procedure. For this matter, this revision should make sure that there is a number of doctors with the necessary skills to perform such procedures.
87 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
Participants’ Strategy
The participants of the Creating Jobs in Health Care workshop in order to realize their vision intend to:
1. Promote the unification of the European Higher Education Area to streamline medical degrees and health care professional training, to better mobilize and create mobility among health care professionals throughout the European Union. This would ensure de facto freedom of movement and equal professional access for all European Union citizens.
2. Advocate on all governmental levels for a fair framework and limitations on employment automatization in the health care industry to include holistic factors such as: safety and liability, patient consent, patient data protection, social inclusion and discrimination, migration, unemploy- ment benefits, environmental and economic consequences within and outside the European Union.
3. Lead dialogue via European Horizons at our university institutions, the health care industry, and government institutions to find holistic invest- ment models balancing technological innovation and their roles for patients, health care professionals, and their communities: social inclu- sion, employee rights, financial accessibility, potential environmental and economic consequences in the European Union.
88 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TOPIC Designing the Education System for the Digital Economy of the Future
AUTHORED BY Jose Cabrera, Albert Costa, Nick Katsinas, Farah Otero-Amad, Karthik Sivaran, and Theresa Volkmer
Executive Summary
With rapid advancements in technology and increasing automation, it is tempting to assume that the prospect of mass employment in developed countries is doomed. However, it is false to assume that there is only finite amount of work to be done and, therefore, automation (or digitization) means there is less to be done by humans. In fact, technological disrup- tion makes it cheaper to do some tasks, thereby making the process more productive and, consequently, increasing the demand for human workers in other sectors that have not been automated. Nonetheless, this does not mean that policymakers should do nothing. On contrary, the pace and scale of disruption is such that it needs the immediate attention of decision mak- ers. A complete rethink and possible overhaul of the existing education and welfare system is necessary. Given the constant increase in the computer intensity of work, primary and secondary education should emphasize com- puter literacy. Instead of focusing on mastery in specific subjects, the edu- cation systems must prepare students to constantly learn and adapt to new fields. Bold experiments with using technology in classrooms through the likes of Blended Learning must be undertaken to increase efficiency and scal- ability. A college degree is no longer a proxy for skills that ensure employ- ability. Therefore, the idea that tertiary education must be imparted right after school, must lead to a degree and must take place in brick-and-mortar universities should be challenged. Governments must implement policies that incentivize a leaner, more flexible and demand-driven approach to the current system. In this pursuit, removing the prime place a university degree holds in the job market, as well as vouchers that empower student choice should be considered. In the future, turnover in the labor market will be
89 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
42 Raja, S., Ampah, M (2016), high. In response, governments should protect workers, not jobs. Restriction “Will the Digital Revolution Help or Hurt Employ- on hiring and firing should be removed and balanced through state support ment?,” The World Bank. for the unemployed. Further, resources should be directed towards retrain- http://www.worldbank. org/en/topic/ict/brief/ ing programs that are based on real-time assessments of demand. Finally, will-the-digital-revolu- governments must do much more to address income inequality through tion-help-or-hurt-employ- ment welfare reform. Despite best efforts, demographic trends mean that there 43 Arntz, M., T. Gregory and will be many who will not be able to support themselves. Ambitious exper- U. Zierahn (2016), “The Risk ofAutomation for iments with the universal basic income should be encouraged and more Jobs in OECD Countries: practicable ideas such as negative-income tax should be implemented. A ComparativeAnalysis”, OECD Social, Employment Time is of the essence. The rise of populist far-right politics throughout the and Migration Working- developed world should serve as a warning; this is undoubtedly the result of Papers, No. 189, OECD Publishing, Paris.http:// governments failing to counterbalance the damaging effects of globalization dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h- on blue-collar workers. Future technological disruption will be increas- 56dvq7-en ingly ‘collar-blind’. The threat that this poses to social stability cannot be 44 Degryse, C., (2016), “Dig- italisation of the economy overstated. and its impact on labour markets,” European Trade Union Insitute. http:// www.etui.org/Publica- Assumptions tions2/Working-Papers/ Digitalisation-of-the-econ- omy-and-its-impact-on-la- bour-markets 1. In the medium to long term an increasing amount of jobs that are heavily routine based—manufacturing, logistics, clerical work and so on—will 45 World Economic Forum (2016), “Robots, new come under pressure from automation and artificial intelligence. While working ways to cost five it is difficult to anticipate the precise employment impact,42 we assume million jobs by 2020, Davos study says,” Reuters. http:// that at least two in five workers in developed economies will be at high www.reuters.com/article/ us-davos-meeting-employ- risk of losing their job due to technological change in the next two 43,44 ment-idUSKCN0UW0NV decades, and more in the decades afterwards.
2. Advancements in technology will not make the worker extinct; tech- nological disruption in one sector will lead to job creation in the same sector as well as in new ones, where the cost of automation is higher than labor costs. The World Economic Forum for instance estimates that while technological change could cost some 7.1 million jobs between now and 2020, it will also drive the creation of some 2 million new positions.45 The pace of disruption will steadily increase making single track careers less common. Learning will become a lifelong process. Workers will have to pick up new skills quickly to remain employable. They will switch jobs more often and an increasing number will be on part-time contracts or work as independent contractors.
90 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
46 Global Challenge 3. The sectors that will grow the most over the next few decades are Big Insight Report (2016), “The Future of Jobs: Data and analytics, Information Communication and Technology (ICT), Employment, Skills, and business and professional services. Without a doubt the computer inten- Workforce Strategy for 46,47 the Fourth Industrial sity of all jobs will increase. Job profiles that require sophisticated Revolution,” World interactions with humans and creative production will be the least dis- Economic Forum. http:// www3.weforum.org/docs/ rupted and increase in number. WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf
47 OECD (2016), Getting Skills Right: Assess- Primary and Secondary Education ing and Anticipating Changing Skill Needs, OECD Publishing,Par- is.http://dx.doi. 1. The industrial era-inspired primary and secondary education system that rg/10.1787/978926425 is still prevalent in most developed countries needs to be rethought. 2073-en There needs to be an emphasis on inculcating computer skills from the very beginning. In the coming decades, being able to use a word proces- sor and understanding the basics of programming will be as important as literacy and numeracy is today. Further, future citizens will have to work in fields that have not even been conceived yet and also be prepared to work in different types of jobs through their lifetime. Therefore, instead of focusing on making students experts in specific disciplines, the curric- ulum should focus on developing soft skills such as abstract and critical thinking, teamwork, multilingual education, and creative problem solving that will help them grasp new skills and adapt to new professions. With these new skills students from a young age will have the skills to adapt to a rapidly changing European labour market. We of course recognize that some students would not do well under this system, especially those who lack a lot of the basics which allow a student to learn at their best, so the emphasis on soft skills should not come to the subtraction of those who need more organized hands on instruction. Through afternoon learning programs, classroom instruction, extra language classes, and tutoring our emphasis is on making the education system better but flexible.
2. Curriculums should not only focus on technology, but technology should be used to improve the efficiency of education. The use of technology will not only ensure quality control in scale, but also make learning more flex- ible. Not all children respond similarly to the same pedagogy. Through the use of technology, curriculum can be individualized according to each as per their need. However, technology can amplify great teaching, but
91 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
48 Fahlwik, Morten (2016). great technology cannot replace poor teaching—therefore teachers must The Blended Classroom. Available via: http:// be trained on how to work along with computers. In these pursuits, states itslearning.eu/Web- should consider implementing Blended Learning—the combination of sites/itslearningtest/ 48 images/Files/Whitepa- the physical classroom with an online teaching and learning space. per-the-blended-class- Both Norway and Sweden have seen success with such an approach.49 room.pdf [Accessed Online 5 Nov 2016]. 49 Casinge, Esacterina (2014). Europe struggles 3. In terms of education reform, Finland is a pioneer; their school-goers with digital education, have repeatedly come up on top in international assessments. Therefore, In: Euractiv Online. Available via: https:// their approach is worth examining: www.euractiv.com/sec- tion/eu-priorities-2020/ news/europe-strug- gles-with-digital-educa- a. The Finns have done away with mandatory standardized tests (except tion/ [Acessed Online 5 for one exam at the end of high school), rankings, and comparisons Nov 2016]. between students or schools. All students in primary school have the 50 Abrams, Samuel E. “The Children Must Play.” New option of taking classes in art, music, cooking, carpentry, metalwork, Republic. N.p., 28 Jan. and textiles in addition to the more traditional academic subjects. 2011. Web. 04 Nov. 2016. This broad skill set allows students to become abstract problem 51 Hancock, LynNell. “Why 50 Are Finland’s Schools solvers. Successful?” Smithsonian Magazine. Smithsonian, Sept. 2011. Web. 04 Nov. 2016. b. The Finnish education system also tends to focus on group projects instead of individual homework. This teaches students from a young age about teamwork. Teachers spend fewer hours at school each day and less time in classrooms. Teacher training is well funded and a government priority. This has resulted in teachers being highly respected holding similar status as doctors and lawyers elsewhere, thus attracting high quality talent.51
Tertiary Education
1. Tertiary education in the developed world, too, suffers from the inertia of the industrial age. As a norm, most well-paying jobs are only accessi- ble to those with a college degree even though it is not unambiguously clear that they impart the required skills. This is evinced by the amount employers invest in training new recruits.52 In fact, a study by OECD has shown that in some sectors, workers with no college degree but
92 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
52 https://www.oecd.org/ with work experience are equally if not more productive than university g20/topics/employ- ment-and-social-policy/ educated recruits. This is especially the case in Europe where university Enhancing-Employabili- curriculum is parochially theoretical and does not emphasize practical ty-G20-Report-2016.pdf training. Therefore, states should consider implementing policy that 53 http://denmark.dk/en/ society/welfare/flexicurity treats apprenticeships and work experience as sufficient to be awarded a degree similar to universities; candidates may be provided with short courses and asked to take exams to ensure the required level of profi- ciency. This will help reduce the burden of public spending on college education and produce a more employable workforce.
2. The idea that tertiary education must happen within brick-and-mortar universities right after school is no longer valid. The current university system is far too rigid and cannot be tailored to the varied needs of indi- viduals. Here too states should experiment with technology to increase its flexibility and reduce costs. Massive Open Online Courses (“MOOCS”) are a fast maturing alternative to traditional university education; they are immensely customizable and incredibly scalable and can be mixed with traditional classroom learning. They can also be complimentary to the goal of learning soft skills through group projects and emphasis on critical thinking. Governments should consider putting them on equal footing as universities through equal recognition and making funding available; the latter could be achieved through a voucher system that allows students to customize their tertiary education. This will deter rent-seeking among poor quality universities and ensure they are more responsive in tailoring courses to the requirements of the job market. To be sure, not all MOOCS are of a high-quality and funding should be restricted to those that have shown proven results.
Retraining, Labour Market Regulation, And Welfare Reform
1. In the future, there will increasingly be more churn in labor markets. Workers will find themselves with skills that are no longer in demand. Therefore, governments should increase funding for programs that successfully retrain workers from disrupted industries to ones where there is demand. In this pursuit, they should take advantage of the vast
93 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
54 https://www.justlanded. amount of data that is available and build comprehensive Labor Market com/english/Denmark/ Denmark-Guide/Jobs/ Information Systems (LMIS); these can be used to get a real-time picture Denmark-s-labor-market of the labor market, identify sectors with scarcity and surplus, and fore- cast demand. This should be combined with policies that make it easier for firms to hire and fire while at the same time provide support to dis- placed workers that encourages them to undergo retraining.
2. Despite increasing youth unemployment and muted job creation in most of Europe, Denmark’s economy and workforce have remained robust. One reason for this is because of their unique ‘Flexicurity system’:
a. This model allows for liberal hiring and firing of workers by employ- ers. However, this flexibility is balanced with generous unemployment benefits.53 While Danish workers are among the most easily laid-off workers anywhere, only 10% of workers express concern with job security, compared with nearly 40% in Germany and more than 60% in Spain.54
b. This model supports workers while they get re-trained by providing financial support up to nine-tenths of their last wage. The national government also assists the jobless by providing subsidized employ- ment training for those moving into different and more in-demand jobs.
3. Even if the above were implemented perfectly, many will still slip through the cracks. An increasing number of workers will find themselves at a disadvantage in the labour market due to the changing nature of which skills are in demand or required for employment. Other challenges facing the European Welfare State are the inversion of the age-pyramid and technological disruption at large; these factors could further increase the number of workers who find themselves unable to find employment at all. While reform might not necessarily have to follow the Danish model in regards to its labor practices, European welfare systems should put much more emphasis on retraining and learning new skills for the future. Furthermore, states should consider undertaking serious short and long
94 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
term studies for harmonizing their welfare systems and adapt them to the changing demands of the labour market, including experimenting with reforms such as a basic income guarantee or negative income tax.
Participant’s Strategy
1. As students and future leaders we must strive to create businesses that engage with the issue of workers disrupted by technology. The world’s best minds must be applied to this problem. This could range from looking at redesigning education with a greater technology component to creating businesses that focus on retraining. Since it is our generation that has grown up with technology, we must lead the way in thinking about how technology can be used optimally and conscientiously to benefit society.
2. Meaningful student political engagement is going to be crucial. We must demand our representatives to address education reform, income inequality, and welfare reform. With the recent political shocks that have swept the world, it is tempting to look the other way and grow apathetic. We must resist such notions. Political engagement cannot be limited to social media posts and seeking validations within our own echo-cham- bers. We must seek out people we disagree with and engage compassion- ately without dismissing their opinions, however disagreeable they may seem. The only way forward is to organize, educate and agitate.
95 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
TOPIC A European Campaign Un-Black-Boxing Data Valuation Processes
AUTHORED BY Victoria Angelova, Denis Iulin, Marcin Kozak, Ryan Teehan, and Morgane Terres
Assumptions
1. The commodification process of personal data undergone by organiza- tions that collect and use the data to make profit (including but not lim- ited to social-media platforms, data-brokers, search engine companies, governments), and the profits that rise from these activities, question the notion of “producer” of online content and how online participation should be reattributed.
2. We state that people should be made aware of the data valuation pro- cesses used by companies on their personal data in order for civil society to take a stance and to start contemplating data as a source of income.
3. The assumption is that the unveiling of processes of data valuation will open new routes of potential value redistribution of wealth to people who nowadays are confronted with job scarcity and the announced rise of AI. As an emerging market the prices of data sharing is yet to be set. In our opinion, it should be structured from two forces: the rate at which com- panies today profit from the data and political struggle over the price. We advocate that people take part in the struggle of setting the price.
4. Data valuation processes and the status of “producer” of content are increasingly under scrutiny by national political bodies. Europe and the US should, however, take a common step toward the regulation and valuation of personal data, that is aligned with the technical and infra- structural requirements of the Internet, i.e. tackle its borderless nature.
96 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
5. Our idea is also a profound political stance as we do believe that democ- racy is fostered by knowledge and that a better understanding of online platform business models can help online platforms gain more trust in the services they provide (hence an enhanced participation) and at the same time help political bodies regain credibility on security and confi- dentiality issues.
The First Policy Idea: A Campaign
1. People have the right to know when and how their data is used, and in some cases—get paid for it. The end-goal is to inform people about the value of the data they produce, so they will be willing to involve them- selves in the competencies platform (described in the next section).
2. One of the main problems in the area of unauthorized data usage is lack of information. Generally, people are not interested in data usage, because they:
a. Do not know much about data usage
b. Do not see data usage as a priority issue. Moreover, the first reason may be the logical cause for the second.
3. Possible solutions in this area can be better informing people of this topic to let them take back the control of their data.
4. To make them interested, we need incentives that will help get their attention, such as material gains. We can show successful examples of how people can use their time and data to make money and take full advantage of new technology as described in our “competencies plat- form” example (see the next section).
5. To make sure that audience is being reached (and the right one), our campaign should use techniques of successful communication:
97 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
55 https://www.statista. a. The campaign should be organized by relevant supra-national and com/statistics/274829/ age-distribution-of-ac- national political bodies and the message adapted to the media used. tive-social-media-us- It should also be constructed at different levels of expertise. ers-worldwide-by-plat- form/
56 American Manage- b. The variety of communication goals have to be developed—general ment Association, Ten Commandments of Good ones and specific to each of the target audiences. They could follow Communication, 1955. the general pattern: 57 James E. Grunig and Todd T. Hunt, Managing Public Relations (New • First—to inform. For example, to inform people about how their York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1984). data is being used and by whom.
• Second—to persuade. They all should be accompanied by good compelling evidence—e.g. the amount of money the companies are making on the audience for free, or how much people could have earned on it if they had known, or successful examples of how people do earn money on their data—online surveys etc.
• Third—to inspire action. In other words, to show that it is possible to influence the situation, to explain the ways how they can tackle the problem—for instance, to get paid for their data and/or con- tent they produce.
6. Audience and stakeholders should be divided in groups by impor- tance from “main” to “secondary”, which would dictate the amount of resources dedicated to each. In our case, it could be different age groups and different social networks.55
7. When the actual communication is being planned, the audience’s commu- nication needs must be considered and addressed with messages changing accordingly—they have to convey something of help or value to the audi- ence.56 Feedback loop (audience engagement technique used to improve the communication) and two-way communication have to be established.57
98 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
58 http://www.smar- 8. The most effective channels of communication for each of the target tinsights.com/so- cial-media-marketing/ audience should be determined and used. In case of students and youth social-media-strategy/ this channel is predominantly social media.58 new-global-social-me- dia-research/ 9. Introduce courses on data evaluation at major research universities in the US and EU.
The Second Policy Idea: A Competencies Platform as an Example of People Empowerment
1. What was once thought of as a sharing economy is now considered dis- ruptive or negatively correlated to high-value job creation. For example, the app Uber “exploits” both consumers, hit by the monopoly of the tech giant (by surging rates), and the drivers, the people who are supposed to benefit most from this innovation.
2. Platform cooperativism, or app-oriented worker-owned cooperatives, could distribute the wealth created by innovation; but in order for it to stand any chance against the “corporate giants” platform, cooperativisim has to have the support of the government or of leading higher education establishments.
3. More than only creating a more flexible and comprehensive “job search” framework, individuals’ data can be used through the platform to gener- ate alternative sources of income i.e. as a commodity that the platform would be entitled to sell to firms seeking peculiar competencies, experi- ence related data-sets etc.
4. The cooperative platforms can work only if federal and state governments or universities provide them with funding to develop their platforms so that they can compete with the for-profit Silicon Valley applications. If the state or federal governments refuse to do so, then funding can be sup- plied by universities, which are often well-funded, and whose students are constantly searching for ways to engage with social justice issues.
99 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
5. Such a cooperative platform will serve as an example of the way data creates value for the users, and how profits from data usage can be fairly shared among users.
Challenges
1. One possible challenge for our policy ideas is that people may be not interested in investing their time to use competencies platforms or that they are afraid of selling their data. Therefore, a careful wording and clear explanation of the process should be implemented.
2. Companies will not likely want to pay for the data they are now using for free.
3. There are loopholes used by the companies to avoid punishment such as lack of legislation or long and boring users’ agreements nobody reads— people have the right to know about them and how to avoid such traps, as well as have technological tools to fight unauthorized data usage.
4. Member states citizens and governments may not be willing to use tax- payers’ money for implementing our policy proposal. We propose the solutions to above challenges to be implemented on the supranational level of the EU through the financial framework that is to be defined.
Helping factors
1. Logical step here is to use a petition to the relevant legislature that requires companies (especially social media and search engines) to better inform people of usage of their data, stop using data without them being fully aware and offer some incentives for people who agree to share their statistics. It should reshuffle our understanding of copy-rights and content producers.
100 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
59 DropBox Is Now Automat- 2. Juridical basis for future law can provide the copyright laws, which clearly ically Scanning Files to Look for Copyright/DMCA prohibit the unauthorized use of someone else’s product. The petition Violations, Last updated should ask to make the social media users data fall under these laws. If Aprl 7th 2014, retrieved November 12th 2016 from: one uses the gathered information for commercial purposes in order to http://www.download3k. make money, part of the money should go to the “owner” of the data. com/articles/Drop- Box-Is-Now-Automatical- ly-Scanning-Files-to-Look -for-Copyright-DMCA- 3. Implement new and existing technologies to detect the copyright viola- Violations-00202 tions. For example, the popular cloud storage DropBox uses hash-match- 60 Removing Information From Google, retrieved ing algorithms to scan files while they are being uploaded to see if they November 12th 2016 had been previously flagged as having aDMCA complaint against them.59 from: https://support. google.com/legal/trouble- If it is the case, the system automatically stops such files from being shooter/1114905?hl=en; and from: https:// shared. Google and YouTube also allow users to protect their content— support.google.com/ anyone who believes that his or her content was stolen or plagiarized websearch/trouble- shooter/3111061?hl=en can submit a copyright takedown notice and remove the file from Google search results,60 YouTube61 or any other Google owned website.62 There is 61 Submit a copyright take- 63 down notice, retrieved a service to take content off almost any website (not for free). November 12th 2016 from: https://support. google.com/youtube/an- swer/2807622?hl=en Participant’s Strategy
62 Removing Content From Google https://support. google.com/legal/trouble- 1. As students, we could spread the information about this topic among shooter/1114905?hl=en other students and help them to get involved. 63 https://www.dmca.com/ signup/default.aspx 2. As journalists, some of us could spread this information through mass media to a much wider audience.
3. We can inform people of the problem and find those who want to get involved and teach them how to tackle it by a variety of approaches.
4. User-based networks can fight unauthorized data usage using technolo- gies dedicated to copyright protection or development of a software (e.g. web browser plugins, such as ad-block; or antivirus components).
5. We could involve grassroots companies as new members to help raise awareness on the local levels as well. (We could look for such companies, connect with them and provide them with all necessary information on our idea).
101 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
64 https://www.google.ru/ 6. Create a new job niche—a company dedicated to find copyright viola- imghp?hl=en tions. They can even use, for example, services created by the potential “violators” themselves—such as Google images search64 able to look for graphical resemblance of the picture and so on.
7. Cooperate with lawyers who specialize on these types of copyright cases. It can be a win-win cooperation.
PHOTO CREDITS
LEFT TO RIGHT: Elin Waldenström Margret Morris
102 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org EUR PEAN H RIZONS
PHOTO CREDITS
Elin Waldenström
103 european horizons youth summit • www.europeanhorizons.org