IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2022-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Global PeaceTech: Unlocking the Better Angels of our Techne

Author

Listed:
  • Kalypso Nicolaidis
  • Michele Giovanardi

Abstract

The double-edged nature of technology pervades human history. Today, the potential for peace offered by the internet, social networks, mobile devices, digital identities, AI, blockchain, big data, geospatial information, is matched by the risks of disinformation, polarisation, online violence, surveillance, data privacy, cyber-attacks, and power concentration. Faced with this knife-edge between the bright and dark sides of disruptive technologies, how do we conjure up the better angels of our nature? Many agents for change around the world have sought to employ and regulate new technologies to foster peaceful processes under the aegis of “PeaceTech” initiatives. This paper introduces “Global PeaceTech” as a new field of social inquiry in the context of International Relations and Global Affairs, with the aim of analysing the global context in which these initiatives are embedded and interconnected, in order to draw prescriptive lessons. The deployment of technology for peace entails legal, political, economic, and ethical dilemmas that transcend national borders and require new models of transnational governance. By bringing together the world of “tech-for-good” and the field of international studies broadly defined as the study of patterns of global change, “Global PeaceTech” fills a gap at the intersection between peace studies and global governance and promotes policy innovation at the transnational level. The paper offers an overview of this agenda in four parts: Part I starts from the IR literature and explores the relationship between technology, peace and war. Part II defines the main differences between PeaceTech and Global PeaceTech. Part III sets out a new research agenda in Global PeaceTech, introducing core analytical concepts and research methods, and discussing its potential political and societal impact. In Part IV, we conclude by presenting a series of example of relevant research areas as a reference for further research in Global PeaceTech.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalypso Nicolaidis & Michele Giovanardi, 2022. "Global PeaceTech: Unlocking the Better Angels of our Techne," RSCAS Working Papers 2022/66, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2022/66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/74985/RSC_2022_66.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/74985
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Graham & Matthew Zook, 2013. "Augmented Realities and Uneven Geographies: Exploring the Geolinguistic Contours of the Web," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(1), pages 77-99, January.
    2. Jason Miklian & Kristian Hoelscher, 2018. "A new research approach for Peace Innovation," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 189-207, July.
    3. Reijers, Wessel & Orgad, Liav & de Filippi, Primavera, 2022. "The rise of cybernetic citizenship," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-1.
    4. Schaub, Max & Morisi, Davide, 2020. "Voter mobilisation in the echo chamber: Broadband internet and the rise of populism in Europe," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(4), pages 752-773.
    5. Mark Duffield, 2014. "From immersion to simulation: remote methodologies and the decline of area studies," Review of African Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(sup1), pages 75-94, October.
    6. Orgad, Liav, 2018. "Cloud Communities: The Dawn of Global Citizenship?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 251-260.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giuliano Martiniello & Sabatho Nyamsenda, 2018. "Agrarian Movements in the Neoliberal Era: : The Case of MVIWATA in Tanzania," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 7(2), pages 145-172, August.
    2. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2022. "(Mis-)information technology: Internet use and perception of democracy in Africa," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22010, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    3. Antenucci, Ilia & Tomasello, Federico, 2022. "Three shades of ‘urban-digital citizenship’: borders, speculation, and logistics in Cape Town," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-1.
    4. Salomon, Katja, 2020. "Dynamics of immigrant resentment in Europe," Discussion Papers, Presidential Department P 2020-002, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    5. Chiara Certomà, 2020. "Digital Social Innovation and Urban Space: A Critical Geography Agenda," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 8-19.
    6. Zack Zimbalist & Jorge Antonio Asprón Ramírez, 2024. "Teaching and researching International Development: Amplifying voices from the Global South," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 127-145, January.
    7. Arthur Hughes & Michael A. Urban & Dariusz Wójcik, 2021. "Alternative ESG Ratings: How Technological Innovation Is Reshaping Sustainable Investment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-23, March.
    8. Giannopoulou, Alexandra & Wang, Fennie, 2021. "Self-sovereign identity," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 10(2), pages 1-10.
    9. Aldo Mascareño & Pablo A. Henríquez & Marco Billi & Gonzalo A. Ruz, 2020. "A Twitter-Lived Red Tide Crisis on Chiloé Island, Chile: What Can Be Obtained for Social-Ecological Research through Social Media Analysis?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-38, October.
    10. Gerling, Lena & Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2022. "Contagious populists: The impact of election information shocks on populist party preferences in Germany," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    11. Anna Blue, 2021. "Evaluating Estonian E-residency as a tool of soft power," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(4), pages 359-367, December.
    12. Jim Thatcher, 2017. "You are where you go, the commodification of daily life through ‘location’," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(12), pages 2702-2717, December.
    13. Paul A Longley & Muhammad Adnan & Guy Lansley, 2015. "The Geotemporal Demographics of Twitter Usage," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(2), pages 465-484, February.
    14. Albanese, Giuseppe & Barone, Guglielmo & de Blasio, Guido, 2022. "Populist voting and losers’ discontent: Does redistribution matter?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    15. Krzysztof Janc, 2015. "Visibility and Connections among Cities in Digital Space," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 3-21, October.
    16. Jason Miklian & Kristian Hoelscher, 2020. "Entrepreneurial Strategies to Address Rural-Urban Climate-Induced Vulnerabilities: Assessing Adaptation and Innovation Measures in Dhaka, Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, November.
    17. Andrea Benecchi & Carlo Bottoni & Emanuela Ciapanna & Annalisa Frigo & Aldo Milan & Elisa Scarinzi, 2023. "Digitalisation in Italy: Evidence from a New Regional Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 23-54, September.
    18. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2024. "Misinformation technology: Internet use and political misperceptions in Africa," Post-Print hal-04423752, HAL.
    19. Ryan Burns & Max Andrucki, 2021. "Smart cities: Who cares?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(1), pages 12-30, February.
    20. Matthew W Wilson & Mark Graham, 2013. "Situating Neogeography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(1), pages 3-9, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    PeaceTech; Peacebuilding; Transnational Governance;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2022/66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.