While female genital mutilation is considered a violation of human rights, it is still widely practised in many countries. With a rate of 21%, Kenya is not one of the countries with the highest...Show moreWhile female genital mutilation is considered a violation of human rights, it is still widely practised in many countries. With a rate of 21%, Kenya is not one of the countries with the highest prevalence rates. Nonetheless, despite the implementation of a law and many policies to prevent it, female genital mutilation is a persistent tradition. It is argued that this is the case due to ineffective implementation of the law and policies. This research investigates the effects that the law and policies implemented by Kenya’s government and non-governmental organisations have affected the conduct of female genital mutilation and influenced local perceptions of it. Through the analysis of existing literature and 9 interviews, it will contribute to the debate about anti-female genital mutilation legislation and strategies by generating insights about their effects in Kenya. Effects of the legislation on the conduct of the practice that are studied are secret conduct of the practice, lowering the age of cutting, medicalisation, and cross-border cutting. Effects on local perceptions of the practice that are highlighted are opposition to legislation, opposition to the practice, social divisions, stigmas, and increased awareness.Show less
The increasing reliance on ICT within the public sector has changed the working ways of governmental bureaucracies from a paper reality to a digital one, and governments are eager to use new...Show moreThe increasing reliance on ICT within the public sector has changed the working ways of governmental bureaucracies from a paper reality to a digital one, and governments are eager to use new technologies for their business operations and reap its benefits just as the private sector does. Since technological advancement is driven by the private sector, and humans are increasingly accustomed to the speed and efficiency that technology brings, citizens are expecting governments to adapt and digitize as well. As such, an important trend that is being experimented with is the usage of self-learning algorithms, particularly Artificial Intelligence or AI. Since AI runs on data, it is only logical that an organization such as the government which holds an abundance of data would like to put this to use. Data that is collected might hold certain patterns, if you can find such patterns and assume that the near future will not be much different from when the data was collected, predictions can be made. However, AI systems are often deemed opaque and inscrutable, and this can collide with the judicial accountability that governments have towards their citizens in the form of transparency. Based on the assumption that the information that is used by AI i.e. data and algorithms, is not similar to documentary information that governments are accustomed to, there are added obstacles for governments to overcome in order to achieve the desired effects of transparency. The goal of this research is to explore the barriers to transparency in governmental usage of AI in decision-making by analyzing governmental motivation towards (non-) transparency and how the complex nature of AI relates to this. The question that stems from this is: What are the obstacles related to being transparent in AI-assisted governmental decision-making? In the study, a comparison is made between the obstacles to transparency for documentary information and the obstacles that experts encounter in practice related to AI, a contribution follows. Based on the literature, it is hypothesized that governments are limited by privacy and safety issues, lack of expertise, cooperation and inadequate disclosure. The results show that the obstacles are more nuanced and an addition to the theory is appropriate. The most important findings being: that data and algorithms should not be treated as documentary information; the importance of the policy domain in determinant for the degree of transparency; that lack of cooperation causes multiple obstacles to transparency such as self-censoring, accountability issues, superficial debate, false promises, inability to explain and ill-suited systems; that more information disclosure isn’t always better; and that the public sector should rethink their overreliance on private sector business models. All these obstacles can be associated to losing sight of the fundamental function of government, serving citizens.Show less
