Subject: [hrpc] some ideas for hrpc

From: Sandra Braman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 08:00:00 -0600

Folks --

To complete what I've started, following are some ideas about ways HRPC
might enrich what it is doing going forward in the various areas in which
it is active.  Again, I may be misunderstanding the goals of the group,
there are always logistical issues, etc., but thought to put these out
there to get the conversation going.  There appear to be three functional
areas of what the group does, synergetically inter-related.

This is a very good time for HRPC to revisit its activities because the
decades-long struggle to bring the technical and policy communities into a
shared conversation has reached a new stage and now has a much more
significant institutional presence than it has historically.  (Hats off,
yet again and always, to groups such as the Center for Democracy and
Technology for providing leadership in this area so early, and to the other
non-profit groups that have now been in this terrain for a number of years,
such as Article 19 and the ACLU.)

Some of these ideas are relatively low-cost or no-cost.  Others would
require significant amounts of time investment by one or more individuals
and would probably need some grant-writing for support.  They also differ
in how pressing the need is.  For document development, in my view, the
need is very pressing.  The need to ensure and expand the presence of
knowledgeable individuals during IETF meetings is enduring.  The
development of pedagogical tools may be aspirational.

I look forward to hearing people's thoughts.

Sandra Braman

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Arguments and Research Regarding Human Rights and Internet Protocols*

One strand of HRPC's activity involves the development of informational
RFCs suggesting relationships between human rights and Internet protocols
and encouraging the building of a research foundation to support ideas
about these relationships.  These documents will be stronger if they engage
more deeply with pertinent scholarly literature and with research
communities using a variety of methods to investigate such matters.

(1) One recommendation about how to achieve this would be to set up a
*scholarly
review board* that would review draft documents from a scholarly
perspective.  Participating in such a board would be very attractive to
academics who want to make a difference -- and who would definitely prefer
such meaningful institutionally-required service to many of the other
options on offer.  There is a model of this in at least one other of the
IRTF groups, so this works within the IETF context.

(2) So far HRPC has been bringing individual subject experts "in" to IETF;
that has been effective in multiple ways and I hope this will continue, if
not expand.  HRPC individuals going "out" to other communities would offer
additional benefits.  Thus a second recommendation in this area is for
authors to present *draft RFCs* to deep subject experts via *conference
presentations* on those researchers' own home turf for feedback.  This
would get a lot of feedback from people who are not otherwise involved with
HRPC and will lead authors into pertinent research findings and literatures
of which they may otherwise not be aware.

It would also serve the additional function of informing people in the many
professional scholarly associations that deal with technology policy
matters of the existence of HRPC  -- the vast majority of researchers
working in this area have no idea that HRPC exists even if they know about
the IETF.  That could lead to the involvement of many more people with
scholarly and social science research backgrounds in HRPC in an ongoing
way, whether in person at meetings or by providing continuing feedback on
draft documents via the listserv.  I could provide a starting list of
associations where such presentations would be welcome, and others in HRPC
I'm sure could add to it.  Once travel starts up again, perhaps funding
could be found to support travel to conferences, but meanwhile, this would
be a low-cost activity while we're doing virtual events.

*Ensuring a Human Rights Presence during IETF Meetings*

A second function of the group has been to have people on the ground during
IETF meetings bringing up specific human rights issues as raised by very
specific developments being discussed for particular protocols.  From my
own (limited) observation and informal reports from others, this is one of
the most effective things that HRPC does.  The goal here, of course, is to
expand on the number of people involved in this activity in a sustained
manner.

(3) An *HRPC (post)graduate student fellows program* could support the
participation of graduate (postgraduate) students studying the
Internet/policy nexus.  They could be recruited from the new and excellent
programs being set up of this kind, such as that at Tufts University in the
US (
https://asegrad.tufts.edu/academics/explore-graduate-programs/cybersecurity-and-public-policy).
These go under different names but typically cover much, if not all, of the
human rights terrain as defined by the HRPC, and they are now being found
all over the world.  Ideally students would be supported for travel to a
year of IETF meetings at a time, potentially renewable.  Perhaps funding
support for such a program could be found.

(4) *Onboarding materials specific to HRPC* would be useful both for
students who come to IETF as HRPC fellows and for academics invited to
speak.  When I was invited to speak, there was terrific informal support
from Niels ten Oever and Corinne Cath-Speth, both of whom made many
recommendations regarding meetings and events of particular interest
(thanks again to you both!), but if the numbers of visitors go up and to
relieve the pressure on those two individuals, it would be helpful to have
something in writing that would serve this function as well.  Those of you
with deep knowledge about what is going on could add a page of
meeting-specific recommendations before each event.  At least two or three
other IRTF groups are doing research pertinent to human rights, so those
meetings should be on this list as well.  This would be a different kind of
information from that provided for newcomers at each event, specific to
human rights concerns.

*Building the Epistemic Community*

Most, if not all, of the suggestions above would be significant
contributions to the important job of building a sociotechnical epistemic
community of those concerned about human rights in the digital environment
that involves a shared conversation between those with technical and those
with legal and policy expertise.  Bringing students to IETF, for example,
contributes to the building of a pipeline of individuals who will grow that
epistemic community throughout their careers.  Thinking specifically about
that problem as a function of the HRPC leads in another direction as well.

(5) *Tutorials* that are accessible to students and other interested people
explaining the policy dimensions of technical decisions would be valuable,
and again, I believe, has been modeled by at least one other IRTF group.

(6)  IEEE accredited computer science programs have to include courses on
"ethics."  Can HRPC members develop *curriculum materials *for such courses
in the area of human rights?  These could go beyond tutorials to include
recommended reading lists, perhaps exercises or simulations, etc.

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:43:49 +0000

Sandra,

Thanks for sending these – there are some interesting ideas to consider.

Colin

> On 12 Feb 2021, at 14:00, Sandra Braman <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Folks --
> 
> To complete what I've started, following are some ideas about ways HRPC might enrich what it is doing going forward in the various areas in which it is active.  Again, I may be misunderstanding the goals of the group, there are always logistical issues, etc., but thought to put these out there to get the conversation going.  There appear to be three functional areas of what the group does, synergetically inter-related.  
> 
> This is a very good time for HRPC to revisit its activities because the decades-long struggle to bring the technical and policy communities into a shared conversation has reached a new stage and now has a much more significant institutional presence than it has historically.  (Hats off, yet again and always, to groups such as the Center for Democracy and Technology for providing leadership in this area so early, and to the other non-profit groups that have now been in this terrain for a number of years, such as Article 19 and the ACLU.)
> 
> Some of these ideas are relatively low-cost or no-cost.  Others would require significant amounts of time investment by one or more individuals and would probably need some grant-writing for support.  They also differ in how pressing the need is.  For document development, in my view, the need is very pressing.  The need to ensure and expand the presence of knowledgeable individuals during IETF meetings is enduring.  The development of pedagogical tools may be aspirational.
> 
> Arguments and Research Regarding Human Rights and Internet Protocols
> 
> One strand of HRPC's activity involves the development of informational RFCs suggesting relationships between human rights and Internet protocols and encouraging the building of a research foundation to support ideas about these relationships.  These documents will be stronger if they engage more deeply with pertinent scholarly literature and with research communities using a variety of methods to investigate such matters.
> 
> (1) One recommendation about how to achieve this would be to set up a scholarly review board that would review draft documents from a scholarly perspective.  Participating in such a board would be very attractive to academics who want to make a difference -- and who would definitely prefer such meaningful institutionally-required service to many of the other options on offer.  There is a model of this in at least one other of the IRTF groups, so this works within the IETF context.
> 
> (2) So far HRPC has been bringing individual subject experts "in" to IETF; that has been effective in multiple ways and I hope this will continue, if not expand.  HRPC individuals going "out" to other communities would offer additional benefits.  Thus a second recommendation in this area is for authors to present draft RFCs to deep subject experts via conference presentations on those researchers' own home turf for feedback.  This would get a lot of feedback from people who are not otherwise involved with HRPC and will lead authors into pertinent research findings and literatures of which they may otherwise not be aware.  
> 
> It would also serve the additional function of informing people in the many professional scholarly associations that deal with technology policy matters of the existence of HRPC  -- the vast majority of researchers working in this area have no idea that HRPC exists even if they know about the IETF.  That could lead to the involvement of many more people with scholarly and social science research backgrounds in HRPC in an ongoing way, whether in person at meetings or by providing continuing feedback on draft documents via the listserv.  I could provide a starting list of associations where such presentations would be welcome, and others in HRPC I'm sure could add to it.  Once travel starts up again, perhaps funding could be found to support travel to conferences, but meanwhile, this would be a low-cost activity while we're doing virtual events.
> 
> Ensuring a Human Rights Presence during IETF Meetings
> 
> A second function of the group has been to have people on the ground during IETF meetings bringing up specific human rights issues as raised by very specific developments being discussed for particular protocols.  From my own (limited) observation and informal reports from others, this is one of the most effective things that HRPC does.  The goal here, of course, is to expand on the number of people involved in this activity in a sustained manner.
> 
> (3) An HRPC (post)graduate student fellows program could support the participation of graduate (postgraduate) students studying the Internet/policy nexus.  They could be recruited from the new and excellent programs being set up of this kind, such as that at Tufts University in the US (https://asegrad.tufts.edu/academics/explore-graduate-programs/cybersecurity-and-public-policy <https://asegrad.tufts.edu/academics/explore-graduate-programs/cybersecurity-and-public-policy>).  These go under different names but typically cover much, if not all, of the human rights terrain as defined by the HRPC, and they are now being found all over the world.  Ideally students would be supported for travel to a year of IETF meetings at a time, potentially renewable.  Perhaps funding support for such a program could be found. 
> 
> (4) Onboarding materials specific to HRPC would be useful both for students who come to IETF as HRPC fellows and for academics invited to speak.  When I was invited to speak, there was terrific informal support from Niels ten Oever and Corinne Cath-Speth, both of whom made many recommendations regarding meetings and events of particular interest (thanks again to you both!), but if the numbers of visitors go up and to relieve the pressure on those two individuals, it would be helpful to have something in writing that would serve this function as well.  Those of you with deep knowledge about what is going on could add a page of meeting-specific recommendations before each event.  At least two or three other IRTF groups are doing research pertinent to human rights, so those meetings should be on this list as well.  This would be a different kind of information from that provided for newcomers at each event, specific to human rights concerns.
> 
> Building the Epistemic Community
> 
> Most, if not all, of the suggestions above would be significant contributions to the important job of building a sociotechnical epistemic community of those concerned about human rights in the digital environment that involves a shared conversation between those with technical and those with legal and policy expertise.  Bringing students to IETF, for example, contributes to the building of a pipeline of individuals who will grow that epistemic community throughout their careers.  Thinking specifically about that problem as a function of the HRPC leads in another direction as well.
> 
> (5) Tutorials that are accessible to students and other interested people explaining the policy dimensions of technical decisions would be valuable, and again, I believe, has been modeled by at least one other IRTF group.  
> 
> (6)  IEEE accredited computer science programs have to include courses on "ethics."  Can HRPC members develop curriculum materials for such courses in the area of human rights?  These could go beyond tutorials to include recommended reading lists, perhaps exercises or simulations, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc