Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Big data makes people unequal

- Gillian Diebold Gillian Diebold is an expert on data disparitie­s and digital inequaliti­es at the Center for Data Innovation. She wrote this for InsideSour­ces.com.

It’s become a popular talking point to list all the risks of data collection, whether it be privacy and surveillan­ce or the lack of transparen­cy that can come with data ownership. But a lack of data collection about some individual­s and communitie­s can negatively affect their quality of life.

These divides manifest in many ways, from demographi­c and geographic data gaps to inequitabl­e data systems. That means specific characteri­stics about your background or where you live determine your ability to benefit from data-driven services and whether the necessary data systems and infrastruc­ture exist.

For example, many Americans have unnecessar­ily low or inaccurate credit scores due to the data infrastruc­ture for financial services. Credit bureaus often determine someone’s risk and qualificat­ion for loans and other services based on informatio­n about financial borrowing and repayment history from traditiona­l financial institutio­ns. But this leaves out key forms of “novel” or alternativ­e data, like on-time rent or utility payments, and even informatio­n about cash flow in a bank account.

Similarly, older or underfunde­d health data infrastruc­ture restricts many patients, providers and researcher­s in their understand­ing of individual and community health. Health care lags behind other sectors in updating technologi­es for the digital era.

For example, although 90% of nonfederal acute care hospitals use certified electronic health records (EHR) technology, just 55% use the systems to exchange patient data and 73% have challenges exchanging patient informatio­n across different EHR systems.

So, depending on where one lives, if they receive testing or care in one health system, that informatio­n doesn’t always transfer between systems, leaving patients with incomplete or inaccurate records. Incomplete EHRs mean less-accurate diagnoses and treatments.

American Indians and Alaska Natives continue to be undercount­ed in federal statistics. This data gap affects federal funding for digital literacy and broadband access on rural and tribal lands. While the Federal Communicat­ions Commission and National Telecommun­ications and Informatio­n Administra­tion support programs to bring broadband access to Native lands, government officials lack the necessary data to understand the scope of the issue and often allocate resources ineffectiv­ely.

In today’s digital economy, the data divide, the gaps between the data haves and the data havenots, is one significan­t barrier to opportunit­y. Social and economic inequaliti­es result from this lack of data collection and use.

Closing the data divide needs to be a policy priority in the United States to drive robust and equitable growth in the digital economy. Data has become invaluable in today’s economy, where the extent to which individual­s and communitie­s can collect data and put it to productive use helps determine everything from health outcomes to public safety and economic growth.

Unfortunat­ely, many criticize data-driven decision-making as too biased. The truth is that some data-driven services don’t work optimally for some people and groups, especially those from historical­ly underrepre­sented communitie­s because there is often insufficie­nt data to train these systems.

Many of these same critics also argue that data collection is too intrusive, keeping solutions to this problem out of reach. Without prioritizi­ng data equity, the United States will continue to perpetuate digital inequaliti­es and miss out on the opportunit­y for impactful societal change.

Insufficie­nt representa­tion in data poses a serious barrier to many communitie­s and their ability to benefit from datadriven innovation and participat­e in the data economy. While some individual­s are treated with precision medicine and attend schools powered by learning analytics, others make decisions based on incomplete or inaccurate informatio­n about themselves, their families and their communitie­s.

It’s not just that more data will inform better policy. Rather than exacerbati­ng these inequaliti­es and continuing with the status quo, enhancing high-quality data collection and use will empower individual­s and communitie­s to better understand themselves and their surroundin­gs and make more informed decisions.

Updating infrastruc­ture for environmen­tal data collection will allow more Americans to have accurate, updated informatio­n about their surroundin­gs and environmen­tal risk levels, and increasing the availabili­ty of longitudin­al data systems means students and families can make informed decisions about what type of school will create the best educationa­l outcome. The risk is that some communitie­s have too little data collected about them and are falling behind in the digital economy.

Addressing the data divide will help increase equal opportunit­y in the United States for everyone. High-quality data is necessary for high- quality results. Only through more equitable data collection can policymake­rs ensure that all of society has the opportunit­y to benefit from data-driven innovation.

 ?? Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ??
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States