Algorithmic Nations
= concept and report
The Concept
Definition
Igor Calzada:
"New political entities that emerge from the emancipatory push by communities, where governance and citizenship are increasingly influenced by algorithms, data-driven technologies, and digital platforms. This is resulting in a reconfiguration of nation-state sovereignty and the emergence of techno-political and city-regional governance structures that operate beyond traditional territorial boundaries."
(https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/16/10/361#B11-futureinternet-16-00361)
Characteristics
Igor Calzada [1]:
Ideological Layer: Emancipatory and Transnational Worldview
The ideological layer of Algorithmic Nations is grounded in an emancipatory and transnational worldview that seeks to empower marginalized and existing communities through the responsible use of technology and data-driven governance. This paradigm is less about creating new entities from scratch and more about reconfiguring existing structures to allow for greater self-determination, autonomy, and cultural preservation. Algorithmic Nations emphasize the role of technology in facilitating community development and social justice, rather than purely economic gains.
Several key principles characterize this ideological framework:
(i)
Community Empowerment: At the core of Algorithmic Nations is the empowerment of historically marginalized communities, such as indigenous groups, e-diasporas, and digital nomads, through algorithms and data-driven governance that respect and enhance their cultural and social needs [76].
(ii)
Culturally Rooted Self-Determination: Algorithmic Nations emphasize culturally rooted self-determination, valuing cultural heritage and social structures, enabling communities to govern themselves according to their traditions, regardless of formal statehood [77,78].
(iii)
Transnational Cooperation and Solidarity: These nations foster transnational cooperation, challenging traditional state boundaries and market radicalism, and promoting networks of communities collaborating on shared goals like social justice, environmental sustainability, and digital rights [78].
(iv)
Ethical Use of Technology: Unlike techno-solutionism, Algorithmic Nations adopt a pragmatic, ethical approach, using technology to advance social justice, equity, and community development, with a focus on data privacy, transparency, and benefiting all, especially the vulnerable.
(v)
Decentralized and Inclusive Governance: Governance is decentralized and inclusive, with participatory decision-making ensuring that all community members have a voice, aligning with the goal of a more equitable and just society through technology.
(vi)
Critical of Statism and Market Radicalism: These nations advocate for governance that balances autonomy with cooperation, avoiding reliance on centralized state control or market forces alone, exemplified by the creation of data cooperatives.
Governance Layer: Structure and Legitimacy
The governance of Algorithmic Nations is defined by its reliance on data-driven decision-making processes, underpinned by cultural and ethical considerations that emphasize inclusivity and empowerment.
(i)
External Legitimacy: Algorithmic Nations gain external legitimacy by leveraging data and technology to meet the needs of culturally rooted and transnational communities. Rather than seeking formal recognition, they build legitimacy through their impact on community development, digital rights, and ethical technology use, fostering self-determination and sovereignty beyond conventional statehood.
(ii)
Internal Legitimacy: Internal legitimacy is founded on inclusivity, transparency, and community consent. Governance reflects the diverse cultural backgrounds and values of the communities, ensuring participatory and responsive decision-making. Legitimacy stems from cultural alignment, ethical governance, and collective well-being, rather than financial considerations.
(iii)
Power Distribution and Decision-Making: Power is decentralized and mediated by algorithms, ensuring equitable and transparent decision-making and deliberation (the right to decide). This approach balances technological efficiency with cultural sensitivity and ethical considerations, ensuring that technology serves the community rather than dictating outcomes.
(iv)
Association and Membership: Membership is voluntary and based on shared cultural and ethical values, emphasizing cultural preservation, digital rights, and community development. This fosters strong belonging and commitment, with members contributing as part of a collective identity.
(v)
Identity and Belonging: Identity and belonging are rooted in the cultural and historical narratives of the communities, with governance reflecting their values and traditions. Technology helps sustain and enhance this collective identity, integrating cultural heritage with digital sovereignty for a rich, multi-faceted sense of belonging.
Development and Economic Layer: Endogenously Developed through Cooperativism
Development within Algorithmic Nations is characterized by an emphasis on endogenous growth and cooperativism, prioritizing the empowerment of communities through collaborative and culturally informed economic models.
(i)
Modes of Development (Endogenous and Data Cooperatives): Algorithmic Nations prioritize endogenous development, where growth originates from within the community, tailored to its cultural, social, and economic contexts. This cooperative model contrasts with market-driven approaches, emphasizing shared ownership, mutual support, and sustainable resource management. Unlike the efficiency-focused Network States, Algorithmic Nations focus on community well-being, resilience, and cultural preservation through cooperation.
(ii)
Storage and Exchange of Value (Data-Driven and Ethical Systems for Digital Foundational Economies): Economic activities in Algorithmic Nations use data-driven, ethically aligned systems for value storage and exchange, reflecting the community’s ethical standards and cultural values. While digital currencies or blockchain may be used, the emphasis is on trust, transparency, and inclusivity. This approach extends value exchange beyond traditional financial transactions, promoting a holistic model that integrates cultural, social, and ethical dimensions, challenging the financialization of social relationships.
Technological Layer: Relationship with Technology
The relationship between Algorithmic Nations and technology is rooted in their ideology of empowerment and self-determination, using technology as a tool to achieve these goals.
(i)
Techno-Emancipatory Approach: Algorithmic Nations use technology to empower marginalized communities, focusing on self-determination and cultural preservation. Technology serves as a means to support community flourishing and the realization of social, cultural, and political goals, rather than being an end in itself. Based on digital rights, institutional structures are interoperable, allowing data commons, as a polycentric public–private–civil society assemblage, to establish data cooperatives.
(ii)
Culturally Informed Technological Integration: Unlike techno-solutionism, this pragmatic approach ensures that digital tools and platforms enhance cultural identities and support community development and social justice.
(iii)
Decentralized and Cooperative Technological Frameworks: These nations leverage decentralized technologies for transnational cooperation and collective governance. The frameworks promote collaboration across borders, supporting digital citizenship and self-organization. The focus is on building networks of solidarity and mutual aid, avoiding hierarchical or market-driven structures.
Territoriality and Legal Layer: Hybrid Boundaries and Strategic Compliance
The Algorithmic Nations’ approach to territory and its relationship with existing nation-states are defined by their emphasis on data sovereignty, cultural preservation, and the reconfiguration of governance structures through devolution and regionalization.
(i)
Relationship to Territory: Algorithmic Nations are not tied to a specific physical territory but are rooted in the cultural and community development of their groups. Operating through a stateless city-regional framework, governance is shaped by community needs rather than traditional boundaries. Central to this is data devolution, where control over data and decision-making is localized, allowing communities to exercise digital sovereignty and autonomy without a contiguous landmass. This fluid, transnational approach prioritizes cultural and social development over geographical constraints.
(ii)
Relationship to Nation-State Laws and Policies: Algorithmic Nations transform their interaction with nation-states by advocating for governance rescaling through devolution. Power is transferred from centralized structures to local levels, where communities govern themselves using digital tools and data-driven processes. By leveraging existing laws and pushing for reforms, these nations create autonomous, data-driven interoperable governance structures that reflect their cultural and cooperative ideals. This model gradually transforms nation-states into decentralized, digitally empowered entities, where sovereignty is shared across different governance levels. Additionally, they navigate legal frameworks to establish spaces of autonomy, enabling collaboration across borders."
(https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/16/10/361#B11-futureinternet-16-00361)
Report
* Report: Pandemic Citizenship Amidst Stateless Algorithmic Nations: Digital Rights and Technological Sovereignty at Stake – Post-Covid Europe #4. By Igor Calzada. Coppieters Foundation, 2021
Description
"In this paper, Igor Calzada, Research Fellow at Cardiff University’s Wales Institute for Social and Economic Research and Data and Research Affiliate at the University of Oxford’s Urban Transformation Economic and Social Research Council and Oxford Programme for the Future of Cities, introduces the notion of “pandemic citizenship” in order to shed light on the extreme circumstances in which citizens have been surviving during the health crisis. Over the course of the pandemic, a debate has emerged about the appropriate techno-political response when governments use disease surveillance technologies to tackle the spread of COVID-19. The article provides an overview of the European situation in this regard, with a specific focus on stateless nations. It argues for the need to conduct further research and gather policy evidence to articulate counter political strategies as “algorithmic nations”. Amidst the increasingly artificial intelligence-driven governance systems in several nation-States in Europe, Calzada underlines the need to devolve data power to citizens, through data ecosystems, in European stateless algorithmic nations."