Nominations for next DG of UNESCO

This appointment will be crucial for the entire future of UNESCO – so, though, it was worth copying this directly from UNESCO’s site at http://en.unesco.org/news/nine-nominations-received-post-director-general-unesco

Nine Nominations received for the post of Director-General of UNESCO

unesco_hq_688px

UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France
© UNESCO/Ignacio Marin
16 March 2017

Paris –The Chairperson of the Executive Board of UNESCO, Mr. Michael Worbs, today officially announced the names of the nine candidates received for the post of Director-General of UNESCO.

The nominees are listed below in the order of receipt of their candidature, within the deadline set by the Executive Board.

Name of candidate

Date complete file received

Proposed by

Mr Polad BÜLBÜLOGLU

 

09.03.2017

Azerbaijan

Mr PHAM Sanh Chau

 

13.03.2017

Viet Nam

Ms Moushira KHATTAB

 

13.03.2017

Egypt

Mr Hamad bin Abdulaziz AL-KAWARI

 

14.03.2017

Qatar

Mr Qian TANG

 

14.03.2017

China

Mr Juan Alfonso FUENTES SORIA

 

15.03.2017

Guatemala

Mr Saleh AL-HASNAWI

 

15.03.2017

Iraq

Ms Vera EL-KHOURY LACOEUILHE

 

15.03.2017

Lebanon

Ms Audrey AZOULAY

 

15.03.2017

France

The Director-General is nominated by the Executive Board and appointed by the General Conference for a period of four years. These nine candidates will be interviewed during the 201st Board session on Wednesday 26 and Thursday 27 April 2017. The person to be nominated by the Executive Board shall be chosen by secret ballot, during a vote that will take place during the Board’s 202nd session in October 2017. Subsequently, the Chairperson of the Board shall inform the General Conference, during its 39th session in November 2017, of the candidate nominated by the Board. The General Conference shall consider this nomination and then elect, by secret ballot, the person proposed by the Executive Board.

Information pertaining to the candidates, together with the procedure for the nomination of the Director-General of UNESCO, is available on the Executive Board website at: http://en.unesco.org/executive-board/dg-candidates-2017.

PhD project on migration and digital technologies

Delighted to be able to share details of a fully-funded (EU/Home) PhD studentships to be supervised by Dr. Silvia Masiero (an Affiliated Member of the UNESCO Chair in ICT4D) and Prof Ravishankar at Loughborough University.  Details are as follows:

PhD project: Forced International Migration and Digital Technologies

Applications are invited for the above studentship commencing 1st October 2017. The Studentship is open to home/EU and international/overseas students. It will run for 3 years, and it includes:

A fee waiver equivalent to the home/EU rate*
Tax-free stipend of £14,553 p.a. for three years
* Please note that international/overseas students will be required to find funding to cover the difference between home/EU fees

Project description

With more than 65 million people worldwide classified as refugees, the world is witnessing one of the greatest humanitarian crises in history. As war, hostility and violence force millions of people to flee their home countries, the global refugee crisis has generated an unprecedented need for new expertise in responding to large-scale humanitarian emergencies.

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and digital platforms are increasingly seen as helpful in handling the consequences of the global surge in forced international migration. But while extant evidence on the impact of digital tools cluster around short-term emergency management, less is known about their role in dealing with long-term issues of refugee integration.

This PhD project will explore the role of digital technologies in refugee integration, both from the perspective of host governments and social enterprises complementing the efforts of the state. The project aims to draw on in-depth ethnographic approaches to generate valuable knowledge on how ICTs can foster long-term social inclusion, and on the complex relationships connecting digital technologies, social enterprises and wider institutional arrangements.

Supervisors: Professor M. N. Ravishankar and Dr Silvia Masiero

Entry criteria

Masters degree (with average programme mark of no less than 65%) or equivalent. English Language requirement of IELTS band 7.0 or above with not less than 7.0 in each component.

Link to Application: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/sbe/research/phd-mphil/studentships/27042017sbe-rmnsm17/

Silvia Masiero’s seminar on big data and poverty in India

Silvia Masiero (Loughborough University, and Affiliated Member of the UNESCO Chair in ICT4D) has just finished a fascinating seminar at the UNESCO Chair in ICT4D on The Affordances of Big Data for Poverty Reduction: Evidence from India, which raised many interesting questions about the relative benefits and challenges of biometric data, especially in the context of demonetisation in India.  Slides of the presentation are available here, and her recent ICT4D briefing on the same subject is here.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

UNESCO/Jaber al-Ahmad al-Jaber al-Sabah prize for Digital Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities

Just to note that there is a new deadline of 14th October 2016 for nominations for the 2016 UNESCO/ Jaber al-Ahmad al-Jaber al-Sabah prize for Digital Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities http://en.unesco.org/prizes/digital-empowerment – do please consider applying or suggest nominations.  It is a great opportunity to raise the profile of institutional and individual successes in using ICTs to empower people with disabilities, and thereby share good practices that can help to enhance accessibility and empower people with disabilities.

ICTs and volunteered geographic information

A literature review of academic research articles on volunteered geographic information (VGI) has revealed a recent, and very interesting, turn in how VGI is being viewed by academics, with implications for practitioners in ICT4D.  In many ways, as I explain below, this turn is actually a return to old questions about authority, indigeneity, and ‘development’.

Two recent articles indicate this turn, which deepens a critique of VGI as something separate from the act of its creation (Sieber and Haklay, 2015).  Goodchild (2007 and 2016) has been at the forefront of defining and legitimising uses of VGI in academia, but in his theorisations it is often couched more in terms of geographic information science, less so in terms of democratisation and participation.

Idris et al (in press) have written, for example, a very illuminating article on ‘engaging’ with indigenous people as ‘sensors’ for ecotourism.  The terminology here is telling, and it comes from Goodchild (2007).  The idea that a citizen (or indigenous person) can transform themselves into a sensor for contributing potentially useful spatial data on the geoweb (i.e. the ‘mappy’ fraction of the web) has a couple of facets that are worth examining, aside from the very passive connotation of the word.

To what extent do the sensors themselves benefit from their contributions?  What are the repercussions for protection of sensitive indigenous and local knowledge systems (such as the location of endangered or keystone wildlife species)?  These are issues that go back to the early days of GIS when Rundstrom (1995) was beginning to ask questions about epistemological diversity in relation to indigenous peoples and mapping/GIS.

I have written about these issues myself, elsewhere, in relation to northern Canada where social media maps hold the potential to reveal indigenous knowledge and sensitive information to outsiders.  The result has often been a patch-work of local maps and map-networks that serve the needs of inhabitants of specific areas, securitised to some extent against outside viewing and user generated content.  This securitisation has to be balanced against the potential uses of such data for development involving outside influence on the data.

The Canadian context is vast, differentiated, and vastly different from many other (indigenous) nations, where sensitivities and emphases lie in directions specific to historical development, trajectories and narratives, especially in relation to the state.

With VGI, crowdsourcing, and neo-geographies of the web continuing to evolve, the old questions keep recurring, and the idea of how much ‘authority’ and accuracy geographic information needs to have to be considered legitimate is continually being brought up.  Terminologies are evolving now as we speak more now in terms of big data and the internet of things, but those old questions still apply.

References:

Goodchild, Michael.  2016.  New questions and a changing focus in advanced VGI research. Transactions in GIS.  Early view online.

Goodchild, Michael.  2007.  Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography.  GeoJournal.  69: 211-221.

Idris, Nurul Hawani; Osman, Mohamad Jahidi; Kanniah, Kasturi Devi; Idris, Nurul Hazrina; and Ishak, Mohamad Hafis Izran. (in press). Engaging Indigenous people as geo-crowdsourcing sensors for ecotourism mapping via mobile data collection: a case study of the Royal Belum State Park. Cartography and Geographic Information Science. Early view online

Rundstrom Robert. 1995 . GIS, Indigenous Peoples and Epistemological Diversity. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems. 22(1): 45-57

Sieber, Renee and Haklay, Muki.  2015. The epistemology(s) of volunteered geographic information: a critique.  GEO: Geography and Environment.  2(2): 122-136.