Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Codes of conduct for farm data sharing. Work done and ideas for a GODAN/CTA sub-Working Group

19 views

Published on

Presentation given at the GODAN / CTA / KTBL workshop on "On legal and policy aspects of open data in agriculture affecting farmers" hed in Darmstadt on 25-26 July 2019.

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Codes of conduct for farm data sharing. Work done and ideas for a GODAN/CTA sub-Working Group

  1. 1. Codes of conduct for farm data sharing Work done and ideas for a GODAN/CTA sub-Working Group Valeria Pesce (CTA) KTBL/GODAN/CTA Workshop "On legal and policy aspects of open data in agriculture affecting farmers". 25-26 July 2019, KTBL, Darmstadt, Germany
  2. 2. Background 2018: GFAR/GODAN/CTA consultation process on ethical, legal and policy aspects of data sharing affecting farmers >> idea of a collective action on Empowering Farmers through Equitable Data Sharing "The core of our vision for the collective action is that farmers can be empowered to harness data-driven agriculture through inclusive data ecosystems that nurture equitable sharing, exchange and use of data and information by all and for all participants in agri- food value chains, with special consideration of smallholder farmers, the most vulnerable to inequitable data flows.” "We believe that a crucial issue is the balance between legal assertions of data ownership and the enabling of fair and equitable data sharing and exchange that benefits farmers and, at the same time, supports the efficiency of agri-food systems."
  3. 3. «Rights»: difficult balance: protection / obstacle • Farmers are entrepreneurs and their competitiveness should not be harmed by sharing business-sensitive data BUT • Farmers need to share data through digital technologies to get precision agriculture to work and to receive data-driven services • Farmers have a key role and responsibility towards society in sharing essential tracking data for food safety, sustainability of production, land use Farm data should be considered as any other business data and the same legal data protection should apply BUT strict ownership and rights-based approaches can be an obstacle to data sharing that benefits society and farmers themselves
  4. 4. Sharing farm data: social responsibility, benefits Farmers share data Farmers have access to better data and services Service providers and govt reuse farm data to build better services Farm data is shared along the agri-food value chain Traceability, accountability Societal goals, SDGs Farm data used only for agreed purposes trust Data is shared also by other actors • To whom does this data belong (at each stage)? • Who decides on sharing or not sharing or conditions for sharing? • What is the legal framework?
  5. 5. What rights exist Personal Privacy - Confidential Information Copyright - Licenses - Technological Protection Measures Sui Generis Database Rights Patents and Plant Breeders’ Rights Traditional Knowledge Who exercises the right? (e.g. the person about whom data pertains, the person who provided the data; the entity that made investments in the collection) de Beer J. Ownership of Open Data: Governance Options for Agriculture and Nutrition [version 1; not peer reviewed]. F1000Research 2017. https://f1000research.com/documents/6-1002 No clear legal framework for farm data sharing
  6. 6. Contractual practices • No dedicated policy or legal framework (except for personal data, confidential data, trade secrets) • Current solution: contracts • Some common contractual practices: • No contractual clauses on data ownership and data uses • IoT generated data belongs to the IoT producer • Raw IoT data generated on the farm belongs to the farmer, processed and aggregated data belongs to the farmer • Uses of farm data not clarified, unlimited reuse • Uses of farm data clarified, not negotiable • Need for consent from the farmer for reuse
  7. 7. Why Codes of Conduct • Trust • Normative gaps Industry-led self-regulation in the form of codes of conduct or voluntary guidelines can have a role in filling the legislative void and setting common standards for farm data sharing contracts even across countries and regions. • Simplifying the assessment of behaviours Like in other sectors when companies want to demonstrate compliance with social responsibility requirements. Forms of accreditation • Awareness building Codes of conduct can change the way agribusinesses thinks about data and make data producers, primarily farmers, more aware of their rights. • Participation and inclusiveness Codes of conduct are normally co-developed by different organizations representing the concerned stakeholders. This fosters trust and increases credibility. Sanderson, J., Wiseman, L., Poncini, S. What’s behind the ag-data logo? An examination of voluntary agricultural-data codes of practice. In: International Journal of Rural Law and Policy, no. 1 (2018)
  8. 8. Three examples American Farm Bureau Federation’s Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data (2014) A set of principles around consent and disclosure in farm data sharing, aiming to ensure that the ag- data is not misused, providing companies that collect and analyze farm data (ATPs) with guidelines when constructing their contracts and technologies. EU Code of Conduct on Agricultural Data Sharing by Contractual Agreement (2018) The EU Code focuses on contractual agreements and provides guidance on the use of agricultural data, particularly data rights, access rights and re-use rights. Its aim is to create trust between the partners, set transparency principles and define responsibilities. Its key points are ownership, control, consent, disclosure and transparency. New Zealand Farm Data Code of Practice (2014) A set of guidelines for data sharing in the New Zealand agriculture industry. "Organisations complying with the Farm Data Code of Practice give primary producers confidence that their information is secure and being handled in an appropriate manner“.
  9. 9. Common aspects Self-regulatory, voluntary Principle-based These Codes focus on the outcome of ag-data practices rather than the exact process or actions by which this is to be achieved. So, rather than dictating exactly how agribusiness should manage ag- data, current codes of practice tend to focus on consent, disclosure and transparency. Scope Data related to agricultural production, including farm data and all types of data generated within the farming processes. Farm data (agronomic data, livestock data, compliance data), machine data, service data, agri-supply data, agri-service provider data. Audience Agricultural Technology providers (ATPs), providers that manage farm data for agri-businesses Content The existing codes revolve around three core common points: consent, disclosure and transparency Sanderson, J., Wiseman, L., Poncini, S. What’s behind the ag-data logo? An examination of voluntary agricultural-data codes of practice. In: International Journal of Rural Law and Policy, no. 1 (2018)
  10. 10. Content: US, EU and NZ Codes of conduct US EU NZ  Farmers continue to be the owners of non- aggregated farm data  Responsibility of service providers to inform farmers that their data are being collected, and how they are used; do nothing without the consent of farmers  Right to retrieve own data for storage or use in other systems  It is unclear who owns the aggregated data and what rights that ownership implies  Originator continues to be the owner of the data and can determine who can access data and use it  Right to know the purpose of data collection and sharing  Reuse requires consent and is subject to purpose limitation  Right of the originators to benefit from their data and to retrieve their data down the line  Aggregated data belongs to the aggregator  Make disclosures to primary producers and other end users about the rights that the parties have  Disclose practices and policies around: data rights, data processing and sharing, data storage and security  Implement practices to ensure data is managed according to agreed terms and for agreed purposes, and accessible under appropriate terms and conditions
  11. 11. Certification / compliance tools US: Ag-Data Transparency Evaluator: process to certify those Ag Tech providers whose contracts complied with the Principles for Farm Data: Ag-Data Transparency Evaluator  Ag Data Transparent Seal of Approval NZ: compliance checklist, review panel  annual licence and certificate as well as the NZ Farm Farm Data Code trade mark to use Opportunities of Data Certification • Opportunity to develop transparency and trust around data uses. • A data certification scheme can enhance trust because producers are assured that an independent and objective party has evaluated the provider’s practices and deemed them worthy of certification.
  12. 12. Challenges • Possible overlap or even conflict with existing legislation Particularly privacy and consumer laws, especially in cross-national flows. • Who is in the best position to design, implement and administer the ag-data code • Ensuring adequate adoption (and enforcement?) Other voluntary codes of practice – for example, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) - are most successful when legal and regulatory obligation exists and are consistent with the standards that government and industry are attempting to implement. (None of the codes reviewed seem to have a significantly broad adoption) • Legitimacy Sufficient representativeness, independent administration, auditing. • Credibility Self-regulation is not always considered as a rigorous instrument. “Self-regulation is frequently an attempt to deceive the public into believing in the responsibility of the irresponsible industry. Sometimes it is a strategy to give the government an excuse for not doing its job” [Braithwaite 1993]. • Risk of watering down the principles by trying to accommodate the competing interests of different stakeholders, in order to attract members to increase adoption.
  13. 13. Important aspects for success Effectiveness Adoption Balance between attraction and high standards Credibility Clear direction Representation and inclusiveness Independence and external auditing Alignment with the broader ag-data normative framework Farmers’ perspective Roles of stakeholders https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDNfCFvRQJeOaVDI-ft37qH3lAldht-1n2XJ2rvWJkY/edit?usp=sharing
  14. 14. Proposed outputs for the Sub-Working Group • An inventory of existing relevant material: ag data codes / principles / guidelines, ag data legislation (also general data protection legislation that might affect ag data codes?) • A review of the existing material with an assessment of what is most relevant for farm data sharing, considering the perspective of small farmers and the importance of ag data sharing for broader societal goals. • A comparison with other policy instruments to understand comparative advantages, necessary synergies, general policy needs. • Guidelines on how to develop an ag data code of conduct, support material to enable farmer-led organizations to negotiate codes of conduct • A general scalable template of a code of conduct for farm data sharing across the value chain validated by farmers’ organizations and technology providers • At least one pilot case (e.g. code of conduct for farm data sharing for Uganda, validated by Ugandan stakeholders)
  15. 15. Useful references EU Code of conduct on agricultural data sharing by contractual agreement Europe https://copa- cogeca.eu/img/user/files/EU%20CODE/EU_Code_2018_web_version.pdf US Farm Bureau "Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data" US https://www.fb.org/issues/technology/data-privacy/privacy-and- security-principles-for-farm-data New Zealand Farm Data Code of Practice New Zealand http://www.farmdatacode.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Farm- Data-Code-of-Practice-Version-1.1_lowres_singles.pdf What’s behind the ag-data logo? An examination of voluntary agricultural-data codes of practice World, US, New Zealand https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/ijrlp/article/view/6043 Global Forum for Food and Agriculture. Communiqué 2019. (Point 3 "Improving data use, ensuring data security and data sovereignty") World https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/Landwirtschaft/Welterna ehrung/GFFA_2019_Kommunique_EN.pdf?__blob=publicationFile Uganda govt. Data Protection and Privacy Bill Uganda https://www.nita.go.ug/sites/default/files/publications/Data%20Protecti on%20and%20Privacy%20Bill%202015%20-published_0.pdf US Ag Data Act US https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2487 CIPE "DIGITAL ECONOMY. ENABLING ENVIRONMENT GUIDE", chapters on "Data Protection", p. 21 and p. 59 World https://www.cipe.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Digital-Economy- Guidebook-FINAL-PDF.pdf Data Matters: Ethics, Data, and International Research World https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ir9CZN9tj0I06u_Uhg9AdhGwk3qIQom7 /view?usp=sharing European Data Protection Board. Guidelines 1/2019 on Codes of Conduct and Monitoring Bodies under Regulation 2016/679. EDPB, 2018. Europe https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our- documents/guidelines/guidelines-12019-codes-conduct-and-monitoring- bodies-under_en GFAR/CTA/GODAN Collective Action – Review of codes of conduct, voluntary guidelines and principles relevant for farm data sharing World https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDNfCFvRQJeOaVDI- ft37qH3lAldht-1n2XJ2rvWJkY/edit?usp=sharing
  16. 16. Codes of conduct for farm data sharing Work done and ideas for a GODAN/CTA sub-Working Group Thank you Valeria Pesce (CTA) KTBL/GODAN/CTA Workshop "On legal and policy aspects of open data in agriculture affecting farmers". 25-26 July 2019, KTBL, Darmstadt, Germany

×