Thread by @TheGovLab

We’ve just started our workshop on Contracts for Data Collaboration (#C4DC)! We open with a note about the need to identify the enabling conditions essential to #datacollaboration and build a community around it.

.@sverhulst explains The GovLab’s interest in this topic, which stemmed from its #DataStewards Camps. In those events, data stewards repeatedly noted that contracts were one of their biggest barriers to data collaboration.

He continues by noting this meeting is not about sharing what we think is the best solution but to optimize what we have for the demand that is out there from a diverse group of stakeholders.

Figuring out how to maximize value is essential for doing good.

And we introduce The GovLab’s Contractual Wheel of Data Collaboration. This tool is meant to be a starting point for minimizing transaction costs and eliminating inefficiencies. Read more about it here: medium.com/data-stewards-…

.@JessicaEspey at @sdsn_TReNDS explains her organization’s collaboration with The GovLab. It collected contracts and started looking at common elements and themes in contracts to see if there were genetic lessons that could be learned.

Contracts are really a framework for cooperation, says Phil Scott. Part of what we are doing is trying to understand what processes we can introduce to bring the resources of those relationships to bear, while creating a community to mitigate risks and reduce costs.

#C4DC participants share their experiences. One notes problems related to preserving research independence while ensuring privacy/confidentiality. Others note need to get data grantees to share with one another. Still others talk about the need for sustainability.

“It really takes a community,” says a speaker. “There is no one company that can come in and say they’ve figured it all out. There are companies that can help in building the understanding and knowhow across organizations.”

“To really start making progress, we really need to build a community of all those involved,” says .@sverhulst. “This is all about relations, but which of these parties set the terms and which accept the terms? What is legitimate?”

We’re slowly filling up a white board of considerations at the #C4DC Workshop. Which actors do you think need to be involved in the contract process? What are the risks and challenges that these actors face? How can we be responsible and ethical?

Phil Scott: “If we work together, there’s additional phase space for us to solve problems. It’s not just about finding solutions but creating solutions.”

If you don’t have a strong demand side, it becomes a challenge. We’ve tried to build a common understanding of why orgs want big data. Early on, there was a lot of suspicion of data use because people didn’t understand why we wanted it,” notes a statistical office rep.

“One of the things we are talking about is plumbing. We are trying to stabilize the most innocuous parts, the pipes, the contracts. Obviously the things that flow through those pipes is much more complex [...] and can be used for myriad different purposes.”

The #C4DC conversation continues. One notes it is important that neither supply nor demand are viewed as monolithic organizations. There are internal constituencies that need to be brought to the table to help data privacy officers and others understand why one want to share.

.@sverhulst: “A critical component is the citizens themselves. One need for forming responsible agreement is creating mechanisms to better hear and respect their concerns.”

One person mentions the issue of marginalization. Data sometimes does not represent those with disabilities in a community. He continues by calling for further natl collaboration to encourage evidence-based practices around inclusivity. Further capacity building is needed.

What are on the #C4DC wishlist for contracts? Some answers:

1. Make contracts routine. People need to stop learning the same thing over and over.

2. Understand incentives for #datasharing

3. Improve timing. In humanitarian sits, some efforts take too long

4. Internal collab

Citing a recent conversation at Bloomberg’s Data for Good Exchange, a participant raises the possibility of a virtual hub to share best practices among constituencies in the data ecosystem.

More wishlist items:

5. Better terms of use so data subjects can better participate in how their data is used

6. A principled approach. If you can agree on general principles, you can get much better alignment.

7. A glossary of terms so people understand what others mean

Further wishlist items:

8. Study into incentives to understand why people do #datasharing

9. Working with the regulatory community to ensure legal compliance

10. Have a documented set of conversations

11. A sense of market norms around retention if access is cut off. At times, there are logical endpoints for partnerships and we need to understand how to wrap them up in a way that is equitable

12. A stronger sense of data standards

13. An articulation of diff business models

.@JessicaEspey at .@sdsn_TReNDS provides conclusion, summarizing discussion in 5 points:
1. Building a community around mechanisms for sharing;
2. Shared narrative and common language, esp. around distribution of labor;
3. Fluidity of the topic. There are many possible entities

She continues.

4. Understanding power asymmetries and empowering all participants at the get-go, especially the citizens whose data is being collected

5. Working together toward solutions

And that’s all, folks! Thanks for following along with the conversation at the #C4DC Workahop. We’ll be sharing some of our big takeaways soon and continue optimizing what we have.