scholarly journals Examining Power Relationships in the Use of Information Systems to Comply with Laws and Enable Social Inclusion

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiya Cao ◽  
Diane Strong ◽  
Eleanor Loiacono
2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (3Sup) ◽  
pp. 101-112
Author(s):  
Dora Inés Múnevar Munévar

<p><strong>Resumen</strong></p><p>En el proyecto titulado Medidas para la inclusión social y la equidad en instituciones de educación superior de América Latina (proyecto MISEAL), la discapacidad aparece como uno de los seis marcadores de diferencia involucrados en el estudio. El artículo emprende un recorrido por dos ámbitos separados por sus argumentos pero conectados por las personas: uno conformado por datos y cifras, y otro por fundamentos teórico-conceptuales. Ambos contribuyen a materializar los lugares para albergar debates en relación con las discapacidades humanas y con las acciones focalizadas, sabiendo que el lugar es fundamental en los análisis de las relaciones de poder y en la comprensión de las opresiones vividas por las personas en situación de discapacidad.</p><p>Los lugares recogen, analizan y presentan las experiencias ya que sitúan la noción de discapacidad en términos constitucionales, poblacionales e institucionales derivados de los datos y las cifras, y la ubican como categoría social en perspectiva interseccional, asociada a otras apuestas teórico-conceptuales.</p><p>Con los diálogos incorporados se registra una mayor comprensión de los datos, las cifras y los marcos interpretativos en torno a la discapacidad, sus intersecciones con otros marcadores de diferencia y sus nexos con las relaciones sociales y las estructuras de poder. Con las vivencias de las personas se reiteran las interacciones entre las desigualdades sociales, las estructuras de poder y la experiencia vivida antes de hacer énfasis en la discapacidad como categoría social descentrada del saber médico para derribar los límites impuestos por las prácticas clasificatorias homogéneas.</p><p><strong>Palabras clave: </strong>Educación superior; Transversalidad; Derechos humanos (DeCS).</p><br /><p><strong>Summary.</strong></p><p>The project "Measures for social inclusion and equity in institutions of higher education in Latin America" (known as MISEAL project), proposes that disability is an important marker of human difference. This article provides two separate but connected arguments: facts and figures about disability, and theoretical and conceptual foundations in the context of intersectionality. Both help to give place to spaces where it is possible to debate about human disabilities and actions focused on them, taking into account that location is a central issue in the analysis of power relationships and the understanding of the oppression experienced by people with disabilities.</p><p>Locations collect, analyze and present experiences since they put disability as a concept in constitutional, population and institutional terms and place it like a social category in a intersectional perspective linked to other theoretical-conceptual proposals.</p><p>Through the dialogues incorporated a greater understanding of the data, figures and interpretive frameworks around disability, their intersections with other markers of difference and their links with social relationships and power structures, is recorded. Through the experiences of people, interactions between social inequality, power structures and the experience before making emphasis on disability as a social category offset of medical knowledge to bring down the limits imposed by qualifying homogeneous practices, are reaffirmed.</p><p><strong>Keywords: </strong>Disability; Mainstreaming; Human rights (MeSH).</p>


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaditeshwar Seth

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to encourage technologists, those who design and manage technology systems, to collectivize and get closely involved in defining the priorities of their organizations, their countries, and the world, so that responsible outcomes can arise from their labour. Design/methodology/approach The author examines this problem from three viewpoints: From a design perspective about what is missing in most design practices to build information systems that undesirable outcomes still happen; from an ethics perspective about how to incorporate values in building and managing information systems; and from a political economy perspective about why ensuring responsible outcomes from technology is not easy. The author describes several limitations faced by technologists in achieving this, ranging from gaps in the design methods in use currently, a piecemeal approach to following ethical principles in the design and management of technologies, influence of the organizational culture and structure and the wider political economy of technology itself. Findings The author suggests several measures to address these challenges and conclude with a call to technologists to collectivize and engage politically to influence their organizations and governments to invest in meaningful objectives for a just and equitable world, and design and manage the solutions in ethically consistent ways. Research limitations/implications It is argued that a new paradigm of information systems is needed for digital platforms, which is grounded in ethics-based guidelines that should be followed by the designers and managers of these platforms to help ensure responsible outcomes. Practical implications Having such a paradigm is especially important in today’s winner-takes-all digital platform era because these platforms are governed by only a few people; therefore, it is imperative to build guardrails to responsibly manage these platforms, and to have technologists who design and manage these platforms to play a role in their governance. Social implications Information systems have the potential to alter power relationships in society, and it is suggested that they should be designed to empower the weak. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is a unique perspective that draws from his personal experience as a researcher and practitioner designing technologies for social good, and examines the problem from many different viewpoints.


1984 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-185
Author(s):  
Michael E. D. Koenig

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah M. Meeßen ◽  
Meinald T. Thielsch ◽  
Guido Hertel

Abstract. Digitalization, enhanced storage capacities, and the Internet of Things increase the volume of data in modern organizations. To process and make use of these data and to avoid information overload, management information systems (MIS) are introduced that collect, process, and analyze relevant data. However, a precondition for the application of MIS is that users trust them. Extending accounts of trust in automation and trust in technology, we introduce a new model of trust in MIS that addresses the conceptual ambiguities of existing conceptualizations of trust and integrates initial empirical work in this field. In doing so, we differentiate between perceived trustworthiness of an MIS, experienced trust in an MIS, intentions to use an MIS, and actual use of an MIS. Moreover, we consider users’ perceived risks and contextual factors (e. g., autonomy at work) as moderators. The introduced model offers guidelines for future research and initial suggestions to foster trust-based MIS use.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document