DIIS Policy Brief

Denmark's 'techplomacy' efforts should confront inequalities

Diplomacy in the shadow of Silicon Valley
Girl looking at mobile phone

In 2017, the Danish government embarked on a world-first by appointing a tech-ambassador to lead its newfound efforts of ‘TechPlomacy’. Wanting to bring conventional diplomatic relations into the twenty-first century, the underlying analysis of the move seemed pioneering: the tech giants of Silicon Valley had amassed power and influence, both economic and political, to the point at which they should be treated as quasi-states. The only problem was, it would turn out, these companies did not want to engage in diplomatic relations. The resulting lack of access to the leaders of big tech companies proved detrimental to the Danish ambitions.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs should
use ‘TechPlomacy’ to confront inequalities. The Ministry should:

  • Pursue tangible change while being realistic about Denmark’s sphere of influence and its limits.
  • Link up to and build upon existing programmes and sites of knowledge on inequality in the ministry.
  • Address technology and inequality in existing MFA partnerships, including with UN organizations that are among the world’s largest collectors and users of data on vulnerable populations.
...

Today, Denmark is attempting to revive its efforts. A new ambassador has been appointed and a three-year strategy on Denmark’s technological diplomacy was presented in early 2021. The buzzword of TechPlomacy has moved into the background. Instead, the new approach takes social responsibility, democracy, and the protection and safety of individuals and the security of populations as central to its diplomatic efforts. More critical in tone, the new strategy reflects the shift from the early optimism about technical innovation to a more sceptical view that supports innovation but sees the dangers in tech companies’ defiance of rule of law and societal obligation. This diplomatic shift reflects the widespread public condemnation of the potentially harmful effects that Silicon Valley powers exercise over our professional and private lives. Concerns about the dangers of tech companies have increased following many cases of data abuse both in Denmark and internationally, including the Cambridge-Analytica-Facebook scandal that emerged in 2018 and the 2021 US Capitol attack, in which social media was used to incite insurrection and threaten the hallmarks of democracy. Maintaining a critical view of tech companies will not isolate Denmark but connect it to the current international climate of scepticism and concern surrounding tech practices.

Earlier efforts at technological diplomacy reflected far too broad and unrealistic ambitions to induce change in realms beyond the influence of the Danish foreign service. So, in moving forward with the TechPlomacy agenda, the central questions to ask are: what is the main challenge in democratising current technological developments, and what can Denmark do?

Inequality and the limits of regulating Silicon Valley

Exacerbated inequalities are perhaps the most pronounced detrimental product of Silicon Valley’s tech giants. In recent years, researchers have brought to light harms such as facial recognition systems that disproportionately fail people of colour, decision-making algorithms and resume-screening systems which demote female applicants, Google search results that surface harmful stereotypes about women and people of colour, and automated welfare systems that systematically punish poor parents.

In moving forward with the TechPlomacy agenda, the central questions to ask are: what is the main challenge in democratising current technological developments, and what can Denmark do?

These examples, and more, demonstrate that data-driven technologies reinscribe and, in some cases, exacerbate existing social inequalities based on group characteristics such as class, race, sex and more. The reasons for this have to do with both who produces the technologies and whose needs are taken into account by technology development, both of which centre on Silicon Valley elites and corporate shareholders. While Silicon Valley has attempted to address these biases and oversights by hiring AI ethicists, they have failed to do anything substantial about the problem. This was demonstrated in December 2020 by Google’s firing of the head of their AI ethics team, Timnit Gebru, after she criticised the censorship of a research paper about the potential for large language models to exacerbate inequality and bias. Silicon Valley’s reluctance to make changes that threaten the profits of shareholders means that governments must take public policy measures to ensure that basic democratic values of equal (economic) opportunity, non-discrimination and basic human rights to live free from harm (including algorithmic violence), are being upheld. This regulation is particularly important when it comes to digital technologies that are now essential for most people’s everyday life.

Inequality at the heart of Denmark’s technological diplomacy

In order for the second phase of Denmark’s technological diplomacy to have a substantial impact, it should be centered on a single priority: addressing inequalities exacerbated by emerging tech and Silicon Valley giants. The aim of ensuring equal opportunity for all is deeply embedded in Denmark’s diplomatic history. Instead of pursuing misconstrued forms of control and regulation in realms that cannot be controlled (eg cyber security), or mixing political pushback with commercial thrusts for Danish companies, the focus on inequality allows Denmark to contribute in ways that are already central to its foreign and development efforts.

In order to enact change, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), including the minister and the tech-ambassador, must be both realistic and strategic about Denmark’s sphere of influence. Being strategic means understanding both limits and windows of opportunity as well as impact, and knowing under which auspices to pursue what priorities. Some issues, such as cyber regulation and deterrence, may be within Denmark’s sphere of interest from both a national commercial and security perspective, but addressing these issues is likely beyond its sphere of influence. Our suggestion to address inequality is a monumental challenge as well, but by breaking it down into individual parts the Danish efforts can be more strategic in where and towards whom it seeks to pursue impact, addressing issues such as recognition, exclusion, bias, privacy or transparency.

To be effective, Denmark will have to move beyond its past focus on changing behaviour through interaction with Silicon Valley leaders. Instead, the ambassador and her team should link up to existing programmes and sites of knowledge on inequality and technology in the ministry, drawing on established experiences and expertise. They should also build upon the existing evidence base, and more precisely document inequalities and group-based harms caused by unregulated technologies. From ministry support to efforts by organizations such as Digital Defenders or Build up, or the new World Bank and UNHCR Joint Data Center on forced displacement in Copenhagen, Denmark is well-positioned in the global drive to employ emerging tech in development cooperation. This would also give way for engaging existing partnerships on the critical connection between emerging tech, data maximization and inequality, including with key MFA partners who already aggressively pursue experimental tech-solutions to problems among vulnerable populations.

Cooperation with international partners

Denmark will also have to mobilize its relations and alliances in relevant international fora. In the EU, Denmark is well positioned to exert influence through the work of European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager. The current focus on digital sovereignty in the EU can be leveraged to pursue a critical tech agenda outside Europe as well. EU’s reforming of digital taxation will be one of several central avenues for addressing global inequalities and Denmark’s support for this agenda will be crucial. In the UN, Denmark is well positioned to

Pushing forward a critical agenda of social responsibility, democracy, and safety requires courage but will find resonance in the international community.

push for relevant global dialogues as well, not only as these pertain to development policy positions, including on the Sustainable Development Goals, but also on matters relevant to Denmark’s upcoming bid for a seat in the UN Security Council.

These TechPlomacy efforts need to be less concerned with commercial interests than they have been in the past. Instead, a strong and realistic analysis of Denmark’s diplomatic reach will enable the country to influence regulation and rule of law to fight increased inequalities. One major contribution would be the funding of research and investigative journalism that documents inequalities and group-based harms caused by unregulated technologies; this would in turn provide an important resource for negotiating regulations. Denmark will best be able to address inequalities through cooperation with international partners who view protecting democracy and rule-of-law as more important than protecting Silicon Valley’s commercial interests, and who are willing to engage in concrete regulations. Pushing forward a critical agenda of social responsibility, democracy, and safety requires courage but will find resonance in the international community.

 

DIIS Eksperter

Adam Fejerskov
Sustainable development and governance
Senior Researcher
+45 3269 8779
Robin May Schott
Peace and violence
Senior Researcher
Girl looking at mobile phone
Denmark's 'techplomacy' efforts should confront inequalities
Diplomacy in the shadow of Silicon Valley