Workshop 4: Building cross-stakeholder awareness and understanding of the direct and indirect environmental impacts of digital/Internet technologies and how to mitigate them
Rapporteur: Francesco Vecchi
The nexus between digital transition and environmental impact has been recognised by the Council of Europe as one of the core challenges not only for citizens, but also for international and regional organisations. Besides, environment and human rights are deeply connected, as well as child abuse and exploitation. Human rights cannot take place in an unhealthy biosphere, and they are therefore double linked to data gatherings and online communications.
First, we need to distinguish direct (e.g. energy consumption, mining of rare minerals and raw materials) and indirect environmental effects (e.g. results of the implementation of digital innovation in industries). To analyse these outcomes, – that broadly cause the deterioration of the biosphere and worsen of life conditions – a standard measure must be defined, like the 2001 life cycle assessment.
When it comes to AI, the direct/indirect effects framework is extremely useful. People generally think AI is software and ephemeral, but it is rooted in concrete infrastructures, like the computing stack that train these large models processing data at a large scale. Consequently, LLMs have environmental impacts (e.g. inference). The direct impact is due to the infrastructure behind these, while indirect impacts concern their application either for environmentally positive and negative aims.
Speaking of cloud services, they are huge factories, data centers, filled with computers and storage devices. They consume a great deal of electricity and water when located in warmer climate zones. If we look at the environmental reports from Meta, Microsoft, Google, their largest environmental contribution (90%) comes from the supply chain. However, this process is not transparent and it needs being more visible to the users.
Moreover, Quantum Internet is far from being sustainable, while the standardisation body for the protocols underlying all the Internet networking has not been achieved yet. To decrease the environmental impact of the Internet, it is first crucial to determine the green metrics for measuring it. Second, we must acknowledge that ranking implies inequalities, since not all internet resources are provided everywhere.
All in all, the fact that we do not fully understand the impact of the latest Digital technology highlights the relevant of keeping this topic on the agenda. Also, it is crucial to reflect on the decision-making process and its lack of knowledge regarding the environmental cost to each decision. Regulation is needed, specifically for water and energy consumption, but it is also important that they are as data-driven as possible.
It is not that easy to make sure that sustainable technology by design implies that rules and plans are followed and implemented. That would requires changes in culture and in economic and political systems, which would also impact on demand and supply.
However, speaking of regulations, a debate was raised about their appropriateness. First, AI are black boxes: we do not properly understand how they work, and their application in society is also new. These dark areas are the reasons why regulators should take a consultative and iterative approach.
Also, regulation on AI is not universally accepted: it is not that clear why energy consumption should be regulated, if we could, for example, use energy for something else, especially improving social standards. AI’s regulation is opposite to the very root of AI’s technology, and regulators are really context-specific. Some countries can be much more cautious, and the Council of Europe’s work is to accommodate possible really different approaches to AI.
Finally, there are several solutions to contain the environmental impact of Digital Development. For instance, we could improve measurement, standards, and collaboration on data collection, in parallel with the regulation process. Also, we should look at the whole life cycle impact: little energy from digital technologies is recycled, and much can be done both from the direct and indirect impact perspective. Furthermore, it is crucial to focus on where the energy comes from, as well as on physical hardware. All in all, we need to form a holistic view on the ICT environmental impact to stress its urgency, even considering degrowth as a solution.
Recent Comments on this Site
3rd July 2023 at 2:58 pm
I agree with Michael’s comment.
See in context
3rd July 2023 at 2:56 pm
This first message makes no sense. Please take into consideration the comment made by Torsen.
See in context
3rd July 2023 at 2:37 pm
3 The Ukrainian Internet resilience is impossible without worldwide cooperation, help and support. There are very good examples of such cooperation, and not very good. These lessons also have to be documented and analysed.
See in context
3rd July 2023 at 12:14 am
In responding to the points around the impact encryption, I would ask that the comments I made around the UK’s Online Safety Tech Challenge Fund and academic paper by Ian Levy and Crispin Robinson are added to the key messages.
I referenced a paper by Ian Levy and Crispin Robinson, two internationally respected cryptographers from the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, which set out possible solutions to detecting child sexual abuse within End-to-End Encrypted Environments that companies could be exploring to balance both the rights to privacy and the rights of children to grow up in a safe and secure environment free from child sexual abuse.
The link to the paper is copied below:
[2207.09506] Thoughts on child safety on commodity platforms (arxiv.org)
And the UK Safety Tech Challenge Fund:
Lessons from Innovation in Safety Tech: The Data Protection Perspective – Safety Tech (safetytechnetwork.org.uk)
It is important that we balance the concerns about the breaking of encryption, with the possibilities that should be being explored to prevent child sexual abuse from entering or leaving these environments.
Andrew Campling also made points about the right to privacy not being an absolute right and the need to balance this right, with other rights- another point I think that is worth reflecting in this final paragraph.
See in context
3rd July 2023 at 12:00 am
I agree with the amendment Torsten has proposed to the initial text.
See in context
2nd July 2023 at 11:58 pm
I would be careful about saying these images have been created consensually. Just because an image is “self-generated” it does not mean it has been created through “sexting”. Children are being “groomed” and “coerced” into creating these images as well.
I agree- however, with the rewritten text above regarding what companies currently do and what they will be required to do if the EU proposal becomes law and is clearer than what was written in the initial text.
See in context
2nd July 2023 at 3:21 pm
The Internet has changed how war is fought, and how it is covered by media. At
the same time, the war has put “One world, one Internet” to a stress test. The foundations of global and interoperable Internet should not be affected by the deepening geopolitical divide, even though it has fragmented the content layer.
No one has the right to disrupt the global network that exists as a result of voluntary cooperation by thousands of networks. The mission of Internet actors is to promote and uphold the network, and to help restore it if destroyed by armed aggression.
The war has been accompanied by heightened weaponization of the content layer of the Internet. New EU legislation is expected to curb at least the role of very large platforms in spreading disinformation and hate speech.
See in context
2nd July 2023 at 2:36 pm
I kindly suggest the following changes:
Please add these two important points that were said by the speakers/audience:
– There is an initiative on the Nordic level to protect children from the harms of the Internet, and this initiative has already been promulgated into legislation in Denmark.
– As the role of parents is crucial in educating children to use the Internet in a savvy way, also parents need education. That’s why we need adult education also from beyond the formal education system, just like the adult education system in Finland already provides training in basic digital skills.
See in context
2nd July 2023 at 2:35 pm
I kindly suggest the following changes:
– governs => governments
– Replace this: ”Therefore, the contemporary political landscape requires three-level trust: political power; knowledge organisations; and individual.”
– By this:
– ”Therefore, the contemporary political landscape requires three levels of trust: trust in basic societal functions and structures of the society, trust in knowledge organizations, and trust between one another as individuals.”
See in context
2nd July 2023 at 2:32 pm
I kindly suggest the following changes:
Replace this: ”Thus, one of the key priorities is to enhance citizens digital literacy and education going beyond only digital competencies and including cultural aspects.”
with this: ”Thus, one of the key priorities is to enhance citizens’ digital literacy and education by going beyond just digital competencies and including also ethical, social and cultural dimensions.”
Add this important point that was said by the speaker: Responsibility for digital information literacy education lies not only with the formal education system, but also cultural institutions, NGOs, youth work play a key role.
See in context