A dashboard of curated information for survivor’s of modern slavery and the people who work to rescue others. This tool is available for collaborations. Please contact our Technical Director, François Pelletier, for more information.
Category: Hard Questions: Justice
Hard Questions: Justice
-
Saptarishi Futures: An Indian Intergenerational Wayfinding Framework
An Intergenerational Future Study model contextualized within Indian mythology, folklore, and generational value systems. This fusion explores ancient cultural wisdom and modern anticipatory governance to imagine just, inclusive, and regenerative futures across generations.
-
World AI: Women in AI
The Aula Fellowship were present, to discuss social and environmental concerns to do with the marketing of AI as a panacea. The event brings together technology companies, civil society, and decision-makers. We were able to connect with other non-profits and universities in this sector, and to build collaborations with several attendees and presenters.
-
Community energy justice: A review of origins, convergence, and a research agenda
The transition to zero‑carbon sustainable energy systems is critical and must take an equity-oriented approach to avoid exacerbating societal injustices. We explore the concept of “community” and its potential as a viable and effective tool for studying, understanding, and fostering justice and equity in energy transitions. This paper outlines community energy justice as an area of scholarship emerging through convergence around three key concepts: community, energy transition, and justice. Using a narrative literature review approach, we unpack the origins of community energy justice research, rooted in two scholarship pillars of energy justice and community energy. We outline four driving forces and two key approaches leading to convergence between both areas of scholarship. Encompassing energy transition initiatives that incorporate both justice and community themes, we find that the overarching objective …
-
Africa’s Energy Poverty in An Artificial Intelligence (AI) World: Struggle for Sustainable Development Goal 7
Energy poverty remains a significant challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where approximately 600 million people lack proper access to electricity. This paper examines the region’s current state of energy poverty, highlighting its socio-economic impacts and the barriers to achieving Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7), which aims for affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all by 2030. Despite the region’s rich renewable energy potential, inadequate infrastructure, economic constraints, and governance issues continue to impede progress. This work employs a doctrinal research methodology, focusing on the critical analysis of existing legal and policy frameworks relevant to energy poverty and the integration of AI in energy management. This paper presents an overview of energy poverty in SSA, underpinned by current statistics and trends. It then examines the dual role of artificial intelligence (AI) and how it impacts this area: while AI technologies, through its data centre s, for example, significantly increase energy consumption, AI also offers innovative solutions for energy management, efficiency, and the integration of renewable energy sources. This paper critically analyzes these dynamics using Marxist and Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) frameworks to understand the broader socio-economic inequalities and global power dynamics at play. Major findings indicate that current policy frameworks are inadequate in addressing the unique challenges of energy poverty and the growing role of AI in the energy sector. The paper reviews existing policy and regulatory frameworks, identifying gaps and proposing actionable recommendations for integrating AI into policies to address energy poverty. It concludes with actionable policy recommendations to achieve a just and inclusive energy transition, contributing to the broader discourse on sustainable development and technological equity.
-
Explaining the Comparatively Less Robust Human Rights Impact of the ECOWAS Court on Legislative and Judicial Decision-making, Process, and Action in Nigeria
This article outlines and tackles two inter-related puzzles regarding the comparatively much less robust human rights impact that the ECOWAS Court (in effect, West Africa’s international human rights court) has had on the generally more democratic legislative/judicial branch of decision-making and action in Nigeria vis-à-vis the generally more authoritarian executive branch within Nigeria, the country that is the source of most of the cases filed before the court. The article then discusses and analyzes the examples and extent of the court’s human rights impact on legislative/judicial branch decision-making and action in that key country. This is followed by the development of a set of analytical, multi-factorial, explanations for the two inter-connected puzzles that animate the enquiry in this article. In the end, the article argues that several factors have combined to produce the comparatively much less robust human rights impact that the ECOWAS Court has had on domestic legislative and judicial decision-making, process, and action in Nigeria, through restricting the extent to which the latter could mobilize more robustly the court’s human rights-relevant processes and rulings.
-
Public Consultation: AI & Copyright, Canada
This white paper is a response to Industry Canada’s public call for expert consultation on AI and Copyright. The consultation had specific questions, which are reproduced with our
answers, below. -
Book Review: Litigating Artificial Intelligence by Jesse Beatson, Gerold Chan, and Jill R. Presser
It is no longer news that artificial intelligence (AI) is being deployed across the board in the legal industry, although the extent of AI use varies by jurisdiction.
-
Artificial intelligence, law, and vulnerabilities
Social vulnerability is a measurement of the ability of communities to adequately respond to external stresses (Blaikie et al., 1994), such as the ongoing “SARS-CoV-2” – Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (Bankoff & Hilhorst, 2004). During these periods of upheaval, people with disabilities, racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, children from low-income families, the elderly, migrants and refugees, the immunocompromised and those with chronic health conditions, and the homeless among others are considered to be at greater risk from the adverse effects, and potential losses incurred by these external stressors. They are also the slowest to recover from such emergencies. For example, recent data from the COVID-19 pandemic shows that vulnerable populations were much more likely to contract the virus, were less likely to receive the vaccine because of hesitancy and distrust of “Big Pharma”, yet they were more in need of social assistance compared to other segments of society (Cheong et al., 2021; Kazemi et al., 2022; St‐Denis, 2020). Classified as “socially vulnerable” by the United Nations (n.d.), these populations are almost always economically marginalized, politically under-represented, and socially underserved. (Un)surprisingly, they are predominantly racialized (Black and other people of color), and have a long history of enduring violations of their civil rights and freedoms, even during disaster response and recovery efforts. The factors and/or characteristics that determine the social vulnerability of a group differ from country to country, however, there are some universal similarities. Risk factors that contribute to the vulnerability of these groups include poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to resources (e.g., adequate healthcare, education, housing, safe drinking water, transportation, and other social services) (Cutter et al., 2003). Socially vulnerable populations are also stigmatized and discriminated against by the wider society, and even criminalized in law, policy, and practice. Forced to live in environments of severe inequality, they are unable to thrive, feel safe, and actively participate in all aspects of society (UNDP, n.d.). When compared to the general population, the capacity of socially vulnerable groups to cope with, respond to, and recover from the adverse impacts of crises is hindered by the inordinate obstacles they encounter in their daily lives (Wisner et al., 2004). These obstacles are indicators of structural inequities and barriers that hamper fair and equitable access (for all) to the resources needed to satisfy one’s basic needs. Social vulnerability is then a combination of the risk factors and socio-cultural markers listed above, which hinder full participation in economic, social, political, and cultural life (UN DESA, 2016). The amplification of existing inequities during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic has re-ignited discussions about global inequities and the challenges they present to socially vulnerable populations.