Posted by 
In this past few weeks, we have introduced end user license agreements (EULAs) and discussed their role in ensuring fairness in emerging technologies in the Global North. Through these explorations, we have revealed that these agreements can provide certain rights, privacies and protections to users and consumers, but that these are only upheld if countries have laws and enforcement agencies to do this. We have also touched on the role of watchdog groups, which can play a critical role in bringing privacy and data concerns to light and forcing officials to act. This week, as a wrap up to this three-part series on EULAs, we will now examine how these same issues present different challenges in the Global South. We will start by exploring the need for better, more accurate data collection in developing regions and how this relates to emerging technologies like virtual and augmented realities (VR and AR). This will be followed by a discussion on the complications of data collection, privacy and use in the Global South, and how these are further intensified in mixed reality applications. Finally, we will conclude with some thoughts on the current and future use and complications of mixed reality technologies in developing nations.
Data Collection in the Global South
The collection of data in the Global South is fraught with complexities, but before we get into the privacy issues of who is collecting data and for what purpose, we must understand the digital divide that exists, the need for data collection in the first place, and why data collection in the Global South is so challenging.
As consumers, we often tend to think about big data from the perspective of privacy concerns. We want to limit access to our data from big companies and governments that may not be using our data for our own good. What we may not realize are the many advantages that excellent and ubiquitous data collection confer to those in regions like the Global North. To put this in perspective, we must consider that the lack of fair and well distributed data collection in developing regions can limit “ongoing development efforts in health, education, and poverty reduction” (Cinnamon, 2019, p.219). While wealthy countries in the Global North have rich and widespread data collection ongoing, from “as many objects and activities as possible—including thermostats, fitness trackers and location-based services such as Foursquare”, regions in the Global South suffer from a “lack of reliable data” that “thwarts both development and disaster relief” (Cinnamon, 2019, p.219). There are many reasons for this digital divide, from “difficulties in carrying out proper sampling” (Nyariki, 2009, p.92) to “weaknesses of institutional and organizational set-up and lack of resources and infrastructure causing operational inadequacies” (Elahi, 2008, p.11). The truth is that data collection can help us, but it must be collected, stored, and used responsibly.
Before we explore the potentials pitfalls of the Global South in regard to data collection and privacy, we should better understand what types of data might be collected and by whom. To do this, we will look at some examples of how mixed reality technologies are being used in the Global South. Most of these projects are run or backed by the United Nations, and they are clearly Data for Development (D4D) approaches (Hilbert, 2016, p.154).
Mixed Reality Technologies in the Global South
Our first example is from Zimbabwe, where farmers with the Commercial Farmers Union employ virtual reality technology hardware from HTC and Meta, for a range of training programs on new equipment as well as for real-time communication with veterinarians for issues with livestock (Mashangwa, 2018). This use of mixed realities for training purposes can facilitate progress in rural areas by making resources accessible at a distance. Imagine being a farmer in rural Zimbabwe and having the ability to learn how to effectively operate or maintenance heavy agricultural equipment, in an immersive environment, without having to bear the expense of travel to the larger cities or towns where training would normally be held. To the same effect, to have real-time communication with high-quality veterinary specialists that can aid in the care of livestock has the potential to prevent disease and stock attrition. Both of these examples can potentially lead to an enhanced local commerce, and ultimately a better quality of life.
Similar examples can be found elsewhere, such as in South Africa, where Naledi 3D develops and utilizes mixed reality programs for HTC and Oculus headsets to be used in rural communities. These programs are used to train individuals in computer literacy, mine safety, sanitation and beekeeping (Naledi3D, 2021). Virtual and augmented experiences in these subjects take the place of traditional learning, thereby circumventing issues of literacy in these areas, and raising levels in education in areas that make tangible differences to communities. In another example from South Africa, the UN with the Forestry South Africa (FSA), in collaboration with the Fibre Processing and Manufacturing Sector Education and Training Authority (FP&M Seta), uses virtual reality to train individuals on forestry and fire safety in “high-risk” timber plantation operations (Forestry South Africa, 2019). Safety training done with virtual reality greatly reduces real world risk and has the potential to prevent serious accidents and even decrease mortality for high-risk jobs and tasks. In addition to the benefits discussed above, mixed reality programs can be easily cross-utilized in different countries and regions by being produced in multiple languages, making them a natural choice to replace in-person solutions (De Oliveira Pereira, 2018). Technological solutions like mixed reality technologies can solve many problems for those in developing nations, but they are also collecting data. As we covered before, despite oft-lamented and focused-on privacy concerns, data collection is contributing to many positive developments in the Global North. As our blog title indicates, though, with big data comes big responsibility. In the Global South, the question is often who is taking that responsibility? How is the EULA being enforced, if at all. We may need data collection, but efforts must be increased so that this is done as fairly and equitably as possible. Beyond the issues of data quality, we must look at who is collecting data in the Global South, and how this data is being used.
Decolonializing Data Collection
As a first example of potentially problematic data collection and use, we can look at those collecting data in the world of mixed reality. Companies like Meta, HTC, HP and Microsoft, all Global North companies, have hardware and software in widespread use for development in the Global South. The mass collection of data by those outside the region, operating from a Global North perspective, runs the risk of “perpetuating Western-centric interpretations and power dynamics” (Milan & Trere, 2019, p.324), to say nothing of the capitalist goals of these large corporations collecting this data. The reality is, even when humanitarian organizations put emerging mixed reality technologies in use in developing nations, it is important that they, and the data collection processes they employ, use a “decolonial lens—rather than a postcolonial one” (Milan & Trere, 2019, p.326). What do we mean by this? We mean that we must look at data collection and privacy from beyond the “Eurocentric perspective”, we must bear in mind the target culture and collect data with respect to that culture. We must leave out the “historical processes of domination, extraction, exploitation, and oppression that are central to the modern world” (Milan & Trere, 2019, p.326). In simpler terms, we must consciously and purposefully remove social systems, constructs, power dynamics, and ideologies that have been built and imposed by the western world from emerging technologies. Failing to do so, we overlook the “richness and the diversity of meanings, worldviews, and practices emerging in the Souths” (Milan & Trere, 2019, p.323) and assume the view that the global north’s methods, ideologies and knowledge are the only standards in which the world can be ran or knowledge obtained.
So how can we employ mixed realities with a decolonial lens? This involves a power shift – moving education and economic prosperity into the Global South, and within the Global South away from centers of commerce and into the hands of citizens and workers. Certainly, the programs mentioned above appear to be doing this, but still, their End User License Agreements (or Terms of Services) are all written by the big data global north conglomerates. This means that they may absolutely fall into the realm of the systems and constructs mentioned earlier. Data is a commodity, and these big data companies are trading in it. So, what data might those using these programs be giving up in the process, when they “just click accept” to that end user license agreement? As it turns out, in mixed reality they are agreeing to much more than with other technologies.
Mixed Reality Data Collection: A Monster
Virtual reality hardware and software vary in capabilities, but general components include the display, microphone and speakers, motion tracking sensors, accelerometers, gyroscopes, eye tracking and light sensors and multiple cameras (Dempsey, 2016, p.80). These components effectively make a virtual reality device a data collecting monster. When you submit to the EULA to use a VR headset, data that can be captured can be of the most intimate type – way beyond the standard name, date of birth and email address. This can include a person’s physical stature based on sensors as well as voice or conversations picked up and recorded via the built-in microphones (Buck & Bodenheimer, 2021, p.399). The cameras can be used to pick up everything in a person’s immediate environment, a product the person has in their home, a brand of furniture or electronic device in their possession, a show on television, and even the faces of those of whom they live or associate with (Buck & Bodenheimer, 2021, p.400).
More advanced systems that track eye movements can produce data on an individual’s “preferential gaze fixation” (Buck & Bodenheimer, 2021, p.399) allowing companies to create marketing profiles based on visual stimulants. Similarly, through a “gait analysis” (Buck & Bodenheimer, 2021, p.399), data collected from headset sensors can be used for biometric profiles that can identify individuals, in some cases better than fingerprints (Cheng, Ho & Huang, 2008, p.2546). Data collected can also be used to create psychological profiles based solely on our preferences and interactions with our environment, as this can essentially reveal our “implicit biases and the state of our mental health” (Buck & Bodenheimer, 2021, p.399).
Conclusion
Clearly, the combination of mixed reality data and the commodification of data in the Global North is a potent one. From a D4D perspective, it is yet unclear how AR and VR data collected from the Global South will be utilized by big data companies, and what impact this may have on the future of the programs utilizing these technologies and the people using those programs. Unconstrained by the laws, enforcement agencies and watchdog groups that oversee data collection and use in the Global North, companies may take advantage of the very people that others are trying to help and the promise of these technologies to bring equity to regions that need it most will be thwarted by companies that control the hardware and software used. We are at a critical juncture where these issues must be considered, and action must be taken to mitigate the potential fallout from unlegislated data collection and abuse under the guise of development.
Reflection
As a person that is enthusiastic about technology generally, and specifically mixed reality technologies, writing and contributing to this blog has helped me continue to delve into the systems that are currently being deployed for development purposes. I have now had the opportunity to explore key organizations like Naledi 3D that work to engineer and promote these advanced technologies in the Global South.
In my research for this blog, I learned where mixed reality technologies are being employed in development contexts effectively. During this exercise I was also able to dive deep into EULAs, examining the issues they introduce in the Global North and apply those findings in a D4D context to the Global South.
I found the development of the blog a change of pace as it allowed me to work with peers every step of the way, ensuring we took the blog in a direction that covered multiple areas of interest, worked well for engagement and fully utilized peer input. I have had experience with both blogging and website development in the past, but I do not believe blogging will be a part of my future professional or academic writing. Other modern methods of communication like social media platforms or podcasts are likely more effective at communicating with a broader audience by disseminating small, digestible nuggets of information to a targeted audience. That said, I have enjoyed the experience of participating in this blog, and further exploring a subject of interest to me in a D4D context.
-F. Ortiz
References
Buck, L. E. & Bodenheimer, B. (2021). Privacy and personal space: Addressing interactions and interaction data as a privacy concern. 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW), 399–400. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRW52623.2021.00086.
Cheng, M.-H., Ho, M.-F., & Huang, C.-L. (2008). Gait analysis for human identification through manifold learning and HMM. Pattern Recognition, 41(8), 2541–2553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2007.11.021
Cinnamon, J. (2019). Data Inequalities and why they matter for development. Information Technology for Development, 26(2), 214–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2019.1650244
Dempsey, P. (2016). The Teardown: HTC Vive virtual reality headset. Engineering & Technology, 11(7), 80–81. https://doi.org/10.1049/et.2016.0731
De Oliveira Pereira, D. (2018). Virtual reality training in Southern Africa. United Nations Industrial Development Organization. https://www.unido.org/stories/virtual-reality-training-southern-africa.
Elahi, A. (2008) Challenges of data collection in developing countries – the Pakistani experience as a way forward. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, vol. 25, no. 1,2, pp. 11-17. https://content.iospress.com/articles/statistical-journal-of-the-iaos/sji00681
Forestry South Africa (2019) South African forestry sector makes chainsaw training safer with virtual reality. Forestry in South Africa. https://forestry.co.za/south-african-forestry-sector-makes-chainsaw-training-safer-with-virtual-reality/
Hilbert, M. (2016), Big data for development: A review of promises and challenges. Dev Policy Rev, 34: 135-174. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12142
Mashangwa, T. (2018). Virtual reality application in Zimbabwean agriculture. Commercial Farmers’ Union of Zimbabwe. https://www.cfuzim.com/2018/08/21/virtual-reality-application-in-zimbabwean-agriculture/
Milan, S. & Trere, E. (2019). Big Data from the south(s): Beyond data universalism. SSRN Electronic Journal, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476419837739
Naledi3D. (2021). Key milestones. Naledi3D. https://naledi3d.com/key-milestones/
Nyariki, D. M. (2009). Household data collection for socio-economic research in agriculture: Approaches and challenges in developing countries. Journal of Social Sciences, 19(2), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2009.11892696
