These are responses we write to documents that are put out by the government or the regulator in the public domain, often intended for public consultation – such as white papers or regulatory notifications or circulars or committee reports, etc.
The SDG Agenda, the sovereign debt crisis and the climate crisis will need brave leadership from not just individual governments of both the global north and the south, but also groups such as the United Nations, the G20, G7 and others, to closely negotiate tough decisions that can have enough impact on the triple inequality – of wealth, carbon and power.
In this blog post, we present our comments to the Report of the Working Group on Digital Lending including Lending through Online Platforms and Mobile Apps, November 2021 (the Report) in response to the call for comments from all stakeholders by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
In our response, we question the assumptions put forth by the discussion paper for the creation of DBs and the concomitant licensing and regulatory regime.
In this blog post, we present a summary of our response to the consultative document.
In this blog post, we share our responses submitted to the RBI to the questions posed in the discussion paper
An analysis of literature on the socio-economic implications of sharing privately held NPD and the objectives of other comparable frameworks suggests that the rationale for some of these goals are unclear. They do not take into consideration the complete economic and social merits and demerits of sharing privately held NPD.
In this blog post, we present our comments to the Report by the Committee of Experts on Non-Personal Data Governance Framework, December 2020
In this blog post, we summarise our comments to the Working Document: Enforcement Mechanisms for Responsible #AIforAll
This research note intends to offer a solution-oriented feedback to the Working Document: Enforcement Mechanisms for Responsible #AIforAll (Working Document) released by the NITI Aayog in November 2020.
This response identifies some overarching concerns with the Report that we seek to convey and substantiate. They are categorised under the following three sections: Section 1: The Report fails to identify the basis for a separate regulatory regime to regulate non-personal data (NPD).
In all our research efforts, we strive to maintain an independent voice that speaks for the low-income household and household enterprises. Our ability to perform this function is significantly enhanced by our commitment to disseminate as a pure public good, all the intellectual capital that we create.
