Strengthening the positive and mitigating the negative impacts for the environment of digitalisation regulations ( Transnational Institute)
8 Dec 2023 11:30h - 13:00h UTC
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Full session report
Auidence
The discussion focused on the regulation and governance of the digital economy, touching upon various viewpoints. One argument stated that liability should not be automatically attributed for actions in the digital economy. The example of Facebook being exempt from responsibility for content shown on its marketplace was cited. This argument advocated for a more nuanced approach to assigning liability.
Another speaker emphasized the significance of considering existing regulatory frameworks and international organizations in mitigating the impact of the digital economy. The Kyoto Protocol was mentioned as an example, as it provides regulations for waste disposal and has provisions for countries to abide by. The speaker argued for the development of similar frameworks to regulate the digital economy. Existing policies and protocols that can guide decision-making were also emphasized, with references to UPOB 91, a charter recognizing seed patents and restricting countries’ seed policies, and the UN Seed Protocol, which protects indigenous people’s rights in seed harvesting and cultivation.
However, it was acknowledged that not all international policies and protocols are equal. Trade rules were identified as potential underminers of policy spaces, and violating these rules can result in dispute settlements with financial consequences.
The importance of not allowing private companies to solely determine harmful content was highlighted. Laws exist to delegate judgment on such matters, and if a company denies the harm of certain content, they can be held liable if a judge orders otherwise.
Lastly, the discussion emphasized the need for global-scale solutions to address global-scale problems. Established international conventions, such as the Kyoto Protocol, were suggested as tools to regulate the digitalization process. The idea of creating a model treaty on digitalization and engaging in discussions to mitigate problems at a global scale rather than focusing on specific sectors was also presented.
Overall, the discussion provided diverse perspectives on the regulation and governance of the digital economy, highlighting arguments for nuanced liability approaches, consideration of existing frameworks, and the significance of global-scale solutions. The examples and evidence presented added depth to the conversation, illustrating the potential applicability of existing policies and protocols in addressing the challenges of the digital economy.
Sofia Scasserra
The analysis raises several concerns about the impact of the digital revolution on the environment and logistics. It argues that the increased international trade and accelerated logistics associated with the digital revolution have led to a significant environmental burden. The rise in trade has resulted in more shipments and movements of packages, which further contribute to carbon emissions and unsustainable resource consumption. This negative sentiment is supported by evidence that highlights the need for a more sustainable approach to the transportation and delivery of goods.
Additionally, the free flow of data principle, which promotes the unrestricted movement and transfer of data, is seen as having negative consequences for the environment. Data centres, which are essential for storing and processing large amounts of digital information, require vast amounts of water and energy, leading to increased pollution. Additionally, the majority of data centres are located in tax havens or large cities, which may not be environmentally friendly. This geographic concentration of data centres in populated areas exacerbates housing problems and puts further strain on urban infrastructure. The argument suggests that the unchecked growth of data centres should be addressed to mitigate their environmental impact.
The analysis also highlights concerns regarding the impact of the digital revolution on social and ethical standards. It argues that the prohibition of restrictions on source code transfers, a characteristic of the digital revolution, has implications for environmental and social standards. The argument posits that without proper regulation and oversight, technologies cannot be guaranteed to adhere to these standards. Additionally, artificial intelligence, a key component of the digital revolution, is expected to meet ethical standards, including considering environmental factors. Therefore, the analysis argues for the importance of incorporating and enforcing environmental and social standards within the digital sphere.
Another area of concern raised in the analysis is the moderation of content on social media platforms. It is noted that illegal trade of animals, plants, and minerals at risk of extinction has been facilitated through Facebook groups. The analysis emphasises the need for effective content moderation measures to combat this issue and ensure environmental conservation efforts are not undermined.
Moreover, the analysis identifies the preclusion of customs duties on electronic transmissions as a significant loss of revenue for countries. This omission is seen as a disadvantage, as countries miss out on collecting significant fiscal terms from the growing digital economy. The argument suggests that the current approach to customs duties on electronic transmissions needs to be reevaluated to ensure fair taxation and revenue generation.
On a more positive note, the analysis underscores the urgent need for digital solutions in an increasingly digitised world. It recognises that the digital sphere is a rapidly growing sector that not only affects us today but will continue to expand exponentially in the future. This observation highlights the importance of addressing the impact of the digital revolution on the environment, logistics, and other social and ethical domains.
Additionally, the analysis suggests that giving states room to regulate and enforce better practices within the digital sphere is crucial. This approach acknowledges the role of governments in shaping policies and regulations that can guide companies towards more sustainable and responsible practices.
Furthermore, it is argued that the verification of compliance with environmental and social standards, even if it may slow down the economy, is necessary. This observation stresses the importance of holding companies accountable for their actions and ensuring they adhere to established standards to safeguard the environment.
Notably, the analysis supports the idea of a regulated digital sphere and the need to preserve policy space for countries. The argument proposes that instead of imposing extensive rules on the digital economy, it is essential to carefully consider what policy space countries require to effectively navigate the challenges posed by the digital revolution.
Lastly, the analysis raises concerns about the enforceability of rules within the digital sphere. The global digital compact at the UN and the UNESCO principles of Ethics on AI are recognised as important frameworks, but the analysis highlights the need for more robust enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with ethical and environmental standards.
In conclusion, the analysis highlights the environmental burden and negative impact associated with the digital revolution, emphasising the need for sustainable approaches to logistics, data centres, source code transfers, and content moderation. It advocates for the enforcement of environmental and social standards, revenue generation through customs duties, and the regulation of the digital sphere to preserve policy space and ensure responsible practices. The analysis also recognises the urgent need for digital solutions in an increasingly digitised world while calling for the accountability of companies and the enforceability of rules and standards.
Ana Romero Cano
Peru has signed 22 trade agreements, many of which are still in effect despite their expiration. However, these agreements have resulted in numerous global demands, making Peru the country with the most demands worldwide for two consecutive years. This indicates that Peru’s trade agreements and bilateral investment treaties have led to significant challenges and disputes.
One major concern raised by civil society organizations is the impact of Peru’s commercial policies. These policies do not guarantee sustainability, human rights, and citizen participation. This raises questions about the effectiveness of Peru’s approach to commercial policy and its ability to balance economic interests with social and environmental concerns.
Peru also faces significant environmental issues such as water abuse, deforestation, pesticide use, and oil spills. In 2020 alone, Peru lost 203,000 hectares of forest, the highest figure in recent decades. Additionally, monitoring in Peru has revealed that over 21 food items are highly contaminated with pesticides. The Repsol oil spill further affected more than 10,300 people involved in fishing activities. These environmental concerns highlight the need for stronger regulations and sustainable practices in Peru.
Another issue is the commercial policy implemented in the Andean region, which reinforces primary exporting countries and leads to asymmetric trade without technology transfer. This means that Peru’s exports lack higher added value or a higher technological level. Additionally, this policy has resulted in more flexibility in environmental norms, which can have adverse effects on sustainability and economic growth.
In light of these challenges, it is imperative for Peru to promote trade that contributes to sustainable development. With political, economic, and climatic crises affecting the country, linked trade that addresses social, environmental, and economic concerns becomes an urgent need. It is essential for Peru to re-evaluate its trade agreements, commercial policies, and environmental regulations in order to achieve enduring and sustainable development.
Overall, Peru’s trade agreements, commercial policies, and environmental concerns raise questions about the country’s approach to sustainable development and the balance between economic growth and environmental protection. It is crucial for Peru to address these challenges and promote trade that supports long-term sustainability and contributes to the well-being of its citizens and the global community.
Fernando Hernandez Espino
The digital economy is rapidly growing and becoming the dominant sector of the global economy. Trade itself is also evolving into a more digital format. However, concerns have been raised regarding the implications of the digital economy within the context of trade negotiations.
One argument is that trade applies not only to material aspects of the economy but also to the digital economy. The increasing digitisation of trade has significant environmental implications. The production of technology hardware and its waste contribute to pollution. Additionally, data centres require substantial energy and water resources while also contributing to housing issues in urban areas.
Another concern is that the current digital governance model is accelerating international trade and logistics, resulting in more environmental damage. The accelerated growth of international trade requires increased energy consumption, fuel consumption, and resource usage. Moreover, the storage and processing of data have a significant environmental cost.
Furthermore, the provision prohibiting the transfer of algorithms and source codes in digital trade agreements is seen as problematic. Access to technology is crucial for a sovereign and just transition to greener technologies. It is argued that artificial intelligence and automation systems must adhere to certain ethical standards, including environmental standards.
Regulations should be in place for tech products to ensure they respect the environment, fundamental human rights, and national sovereignty. For instance, the illegal sale of protected animals or plants on platforms such as Facebook is harmful. Additionally, the management of pesticides through technological means like drones should be checked and controlled through access to the source code.
On the other hand, levying taxes on electronic transmissions could provide the necessary resources for states to address climate change. The implementation of taxes can help countries invest in renewable energy, strengthen their control capabilities, and raise awareness through campaigns. Developing countries are losing billions in potential revenue due to the lack of customs duties on electronic transmissions.
The rapid growth of the digital economy necessitates the need for regulation in the ever-evolving technology sector. The impact of technology on the economy and the environment can have massive implications. While technology progress is inevitable, it must be handled responsibly to avoid exacerbating global inequalities and leading to environmental exploitation.
The current trade rules have been criticised for perpetuating economic disparities and a pattern of exploitation. Companies like Amazon have made significant profits but paid little to no taxes in developing countries. Moreover, the existing rules protect intellectual property and allow powerful multinationals to monopolise resource-rich regions.
Protocols and policy spaces do exist, but they do not offer the same level of protection. The WTO rules have been influential in undermining policy spaces. For instance, if a country violates trade rules, it can lead to a dispute settlement that will cost them money.
The UPOB 91, which recognises the patenting of seeds, has been seen as a problematic space. The European Union pushes for countries to join the UPOB 91 through trade agreements. If a country like Mexico decides to join, it becomes liable for lawsuits if it fails to implement certain policies.
In conclusion, the growth of the digital economy and the increasing digitisation of trade present both opportunities and challenges. Concerns have been raised about the environmental impact, the need for regulations to protect the environment and human rights, as well as the current trade rules perpetuating economic disparities. The discussion around these issues highlights the importance of responsible handling of technology to avoid exacerbating global inequalities and environmental exploitation. Moreover, there is a need for more comprehensive and protective protocols and policy spaces to address these concerns and strive for a more sustainable and equitable digital economy.
Deborah James
The ongoing debate centres around the necessity of implementing digital economy regulations and their potential impact on government control and corporate interests. One perspective argues that these regulations tend to limit government control while favouring corporations. It is claimed that big tech companies evade regulations and taxes through their business models. Additionally, trade disciplines are said to restrain governments’ ability to control foreign corporations. Proposed digital trade rules have come under scrutiny for granting excessive power and profit to tech corporations while hampering the effectiveness of government regulation. It is highlighted that these rules would allow tech giants like Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft to access tax evasions, the non-disclosure of proprietary algorithms, and unrestricted data flows. The United States has recently withdrawn its support for some of these proposals due to the recognition of the need for further regulation. Furthermore, it is argued that the existing digital trade rules do not align with the development objectives set forth by developing countries.
On the other hand, proponents of maintaining regulatory space for future digital innovations contend that it is crucial to ensure countries have the capacity to regulate emerging technologies like artificial intelligence (AI). They caution against tying up regulatory space in trade agreements, as it could inhibit future governance and hinder the ability to effectively regulate new technologies.
Regarding social media platforms, Facebook’s business model is criticised for promoting misinformation. Whistleblowers have exposed the lack of monitoring of misinformation in certain regions. It is alleged that Facebook’s business model enables electoral manipulation and the fomenting of violence and discrimination for the sake of generating more profits.
In terms of online content liability, the viewpoint is that online platforms should be held accountable for illegal or harmful content. Several supporting facts underpin this argument, including cases where harm was caused, such as a girl committing suicide due to continuous exposure to harmful content. In another instance, the trafficking of women and children was facilitated electronically, highlighting the lack of regulation in the digital realm compared to the physical world.
The exemption of online intermediaries from liability, similar to the physical world, is deemed problematic. This exemption is instated by Section 230 of telecommunications law in the United States. It has been pointed out that such an exemption leads to prohibited actions, like trafficking, being conducted online with minimal consequences.
Concerns are raised about the lack of enforceable regulation in the digital sphere. The only negotiated rules in the digital domain are found within free trade agreements, while principles of ethics on AI and global digital compacts lack enforceability, functioning primarily as good practices.
Lastly, the necessity of fair trade, anti-monopoly rules, pro-competition, and global taxation is acknowledged, but it is highlighted that these rules are often deemed non-binding due to the significant power held by large corporations. Big tech companies are purportedly advocating for self-regulation, while developing countries face challenges in achieving fair tax rules for digitalisation, primarily due to resistance from developed countries.
Overall, the debate on digital economy regulations encompasses a range of viewpoints and considerations. It is evident that balancing government control, corporate interests, regulation of emerging technologies, and liability for online content pose significant challenges. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, finding effective solutions that promote equitable and responsible digital governance remains a pressing issue.
Speakers
AR
Ana Romero Cano
Speech speed
122 words per minute
Speech length
1158 words
Speech time
568 secs
A
Auidence
Speech speed
153 words per minute
Speech length
574 words
Speech time
225 secs
DJ
Deborah James
Speech speed
211 words per minute
Speech length
3957 words
Speech time
1126 secs
FH
Fernando Hernandez Espino
Speech speed
173 words per minute
Speech length
3700 words
Speech time
1286 secs
SS
Sofia Scasserra
Speech speed
173 words per minute
Speech length
3897 words
Speech time
1349 secs
Related event
