Surveillance for development? Debating citizen identification systems in Ghana

• Main Author: Oduro-Marfo, Smith
• Other Authors: Bennett, Colin J.
• Format: Others
• Language: English; en
• Published: 2021
• Subjects: Technology; Surveillance; Development; Ghana; Africa; Identification; Identity; Citizenship; ID4D
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/1828/13595

Many Global South states are developing citizen identification databases that are digital, smart and meant to be integrated and interoperable with other systems. Admittedly, there are nuances in the historical and institutional realities across Global South countries, yet these countries are common in terms of how their governments and international development actors frame citizen identification systems as necessary for development. The main argument advanced by various governmental and non-governmental actors is that for the state to be effective and efficient, it must be able to know who is who, who is where and who is doing what, and that states with the needed surveillance capacity can better extract taxes, promote national and personal security, and distribute public goods and services. Overall, a narrative of economic progress is dominating the promotion of citizen identification systems in the Global South. Conversely, an illegible society is being framed as a source of state incapacity and relatively lower possibilities of economic advancement. Such positive outlooks on surveillance systems must also contend with critical approaches to surveillance systems. Indeed, surveillance studies scholarship on Global South countries tends to frame the state’s embrace of surveillance systems as deepening authoritarianism and repression. But what if a Global South state with democratic institutions is embracing surveillance-oriented systems in the name of development? How do stakeholders in these countries justify surveillance and how is the latter critiqued? Even if surveillance systems could spur development, how do prevailing context and institutions matter for ongoing citizen identification projects and the debates around them? The foregoing questions underpin my research to understand the spread of surveillance systems in the Global South beyond the argument that it is to serve authoritarianism and repression. Overall, I seek to understand the implications of framing surveillance-oriented systems as necessary for development. In this study, I research three citizen identification projects in Ghana and track the related justifications and concerns of various state and non-state actors. The three projects are: the national identification system, the national digital property addressing system and the SIM card registration regime. I seek to understand how state actors, civil society, private corporations and international actors draw on development narratives to support citizen identification projects and also if, why and how these projects are contested. I map and draw on a history of citizen identification systems in Ghana from the colonial to the post-colonial era to understand the legacies that shape the current identification projects in Ghana. I find a general consensus amongst state and non-state actors about the value of citizen identification systems to development in Ghana. Economic rationales dominate arguments in support of citizen identification systems. Yet, there are still concerns about surveillance including privacy intrusions, data breaches, corruption and more importantly, how these projects could marginalize certain groups of citizens. Despite the broad support for the three projects, it is noteworthy that the state in Ghana has struggled to successfully implement them. I explain these struggles as tied to institutional factors including the unresolved contentions about citizenship and the existence of weak legacy systems for citizen identification in Ghana. The Ghana case shows that promoting surveillance in the name of development could easily decenter critical arguments against surveillance systems. Development as existential as it is normally framed, can easily take precedence over other concerns like privacy. There is a consensus in Ghana, perhaps similar to other Global South countries that the state must perform better to improve the experience of citizenship. Thus, if it is surveillance-oriented systems that can make the state perform better and care better for its citizens, then why not? Yet, practically, while citizen identification systems automatically enhance state surveillance, whether such enhanced state capacity will lead to inclusive development cannot be assured. My proposed ‘Surveillance for Development’ (S4D) frame captures the notion that a specific approach to, or emphasis in development is being promoted in Global South states based on the idea that these states must ‘see’ their citizens and societies in a particular way in order to develop. This ‘seeing’ is based on digital and interoperable surveillance systems that permit the continuous tracking of citizens in a non-physical, integrated and distributed manner by the state and even transnationally. These surveillance systems also permit an assemblage that allows state and governmental actors to generate various data doubles or multiple versions of citizens and profile them with attached and predetermined risk values. The profile of each data double is likely different based on what sets of information and from which agencies are combined about a person, such that even the stability of the identity of a particular citizen cannot be assured. In sum, by tying surveillance to development, the stakes are higher for citizens in Global South countries as the potential adverse implications are not just about privacy breaches but also about threats to citizenship as a status and as an experience, for example. === Graduate === 2022-12-10