Our grantees have helped put fundamental rights and democratic freedoms at the heart of policymaking on AI. They’ve brought marginalised communities such as migrants, autistic people and sex workers into the debate. And they’re exploring how AI is intersecting in criminal justice, climate, health and more.
As well as offering financial support, we help organisations build networks, gain skills and work collaboratively to drive change.
Issued: Nov 2024|1 year 2 monthsClosed
Fundación Ciudadana Civio (Civio)
€40.250 Build
Spain
Civio used investigative journalism with transparent methodologies, combined with their knowledge of access to information, litigation and public procurement to look closely at the public healthcare and welfare systems in Spain. Their first exploration has shown AI systems being used without anyone having a registry of them. Their investigation into the biased BOSCO welfare system won a Supreme Court victory for algorithm transparency.
This grant enabled SHARE Foundation and Politiscope to join forces to monitor and advocate on the development and implementation of AI legislation, as well as deliver existing, ongoing and planned AI projects in Serbia and Croatia. Their project – Monitoring AI-backed Surveillance Architectures (MASA) – advocate for better human rights standards in the development and implementation of legislation around AI in Europe.
The grant supported SHARE Foundation and Politiscope to continue their Monitoring AI-backed Surveillance Architectures (MASA) project. Both organisations maintained a vigilant focus on the deployment of advanced technologies in Serbia and Croatia, particularly focusing on the impact of AI misuse on vulnerable groups. They advocated for enhanced human rights standards in the development and application of legislation at both the national and EU levels.
Ada Lovelace Institute focused on how liability is distributed across AI value chains. They investigated the public benefit of AI across disciplines, and how industrial and regulatory policy should be designed and evalauted to maximise that benefit. They also informed the implementation of the AI Act and the development of the AI Office, through their relationship with national AI Safety Institutes. The grant also enabled Ada to develop its strategy, internal culture and support Ada staff training.
EuroMed Rights investigated how EU-funded technology and AI were used in EU migration policies that shift border control and asylum processing to non-EU countries such as Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Turkey and Lebanon.
It carried out advocacy and communication work to shed light on the risks to fundamental rights, and mobilised its network of 70 civil society organisations in 30 countries around the links between migration policy and human rights.
Systemic Justice explored how technology and AI cause daily, systemic harms to marginalised groups across Europe, and seek to disrupt and alleviate these harms by pioneering a new model of community-driven litigation.
Simultaneously, Systemic Justice informed the policy and advocacy work of organisations in Europe, forming partnerships with movements and collectives to build their power and knowledge and putting communities in the driver’s seat every step of the way.
Through its three-year "AI and the Rights of Autistic people" project, the European Council of Autistic People worked to understand autistic people's needs and concerns about AI. It created resources on what AI is and how to shape better AI for autistic people, and ran webinars and events across Europe to train autistic advocates to bring their perspectives to decisionmakers, researchers and industry.
The Good Lobby Italy lead the development of a nascent coalition of Italian civil society organisations – including Privacy Network, Hermes Centre for Transparency and Digital Human Rights, Strali, Period Think Tank and Amnesty International Italia – focused on digital human rights and the regulation of the impact of AI. The Good Lobby contributed its expertise in advocacy and lobbying.
CDT Europe conducted research into how individuals can challenge the harms caused by AI systems using the AI Act and existing legislation. They identified gaps that warrant further updates to the law, and monitored the progress of the AI Liability Directive. Their research was informed by sessions with groups impacted by AI harms and equality law experts.