Panic with a Purpose

Episode 1: Data Is The New... Everything?

• Nhi and CJ • Season 1 • Episode 1

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 52:10

Data is everything and everything’s data, but who actually owns it? And what does it mean for us and the planet?

For our first episode, we decided to go big right out of the gate and tackle the messy, fascinating world of data, it’s ownership, and why it matters.
We discuss what we even mean when we say “data” in the first place, try to define what counts as environmental data (spoiler: context is everything), and unpack how seemingly harmless bits of information can be stitched together into something powerful (and sometimes terrifying), especially when controlled by big tech and opaque power systems.
And most importantly, we explore what an alternative data ownership model could look like, and how it might help build a more equitable future for all of us.

To learn more, visit https://www.nuatlas.org/podcast

Additional Reading & Resources

https://doughnuteconomics.org/
https://www.kateraworth.com/doughnut/ 

FOLLOW US ON
Insta   / nu.atlasorg
Linkedin   / nuatlas 

Cast and crew:
Hosts and creators: Nhiyc (Nhi Corcoran) & CJ the EJ Guy (Charles Knoble) 
Producer: Joanna Jastrzebska
Editor: Maxine Beceril

Disclaimer:
This episode reflects a Global North perspective, shaped by English-language sources and Western frameworks - so blind spots exist. We don’t claim objectivity or treat Western frameworks as universal, and we avoid framing impacted communities only as victims.

If we’ve missed something or misrepresented an issue, we welcome your input—this is an ongoing conversation.

SPEAKER_02

And what I'm thinking of is, did you see the news about the meta glasses recording things when people were not knowing they were recording things?

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. Is that funny?

SPEAKER_02

That is the question. It is kind of funny. Most of the subjects that I have found in this space are very scary and often harmful. This is one where it was at least harmful and scary with a funny twist.

SPEAKER_00

Okay, but tell me about it.

SPEAKER_02

My understanding was that the metaglasses were inadvertently recording people without their knowledge. And so there were people abroad that were reviewing video footage of the metaglasses without the person's knowledge. And so they were like, yeah, we've definitely been like reviewing people having sex and they didn't know it.

SPEAKER_00

Oh my god.

SPEAKER_02

A little terrifying.

SPEAKER_00

I don't know how to process this. My first thought was, dang, they can make hella cash on Pornhub. And second thought. My second thought was, holy shit, invasion of privacy. And is this it must be stored, right? In a cloud.

SPEAKER_02

This feels like a pretty like straightforward jump from like when everybody was super excited about the Alexa, and then they were like, Why am I getting very specific advertising all of a sudden? And then it made the jump to why is everything I'm recording, everything that I am seeing being recorded in some capacity.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, holy sh you know, okay. That's actually a good segue because we're talking about data sovereignty and democracy and ownership today. Because theoretically, you know, with the if you own the glasses, you should own everything that it records.

SPEAKER_02

Right. And so in theory, you should be getting residuals off of the porn that they are producing for you.

SPEAKER_00

Exactly.

SPEAKER_02

Man, this was such a funny subject when I was reading about it. And then it's again, it's another terrifying one. They're all terrifying. All of these data subjects are terrifying.

SPEAKER_00

Oh my god. Okay, well, I guess.

SPEAKER_02

We did it. Cold open.

SPEAKER_00

This is Panic with a Purpose, a new data podcast. We're here because the planet is burning, inequality is raging, and somehow topic graphs and algorithms might be part of the solution. I'm me.

SPEAKER_02

And I'm CJ the EJ guy, and today we're exploring the intersection of climate, technology, and justice. Because let's face it, panicing alone won't save the planet, but anything with a purpose might just give us a fighting chance.

SPEAKER_00

Hey everybody, it's me. Welcome to Panic with a Purpose. Um, as you can tell, I am by myself. CJ isn't here. We were so excited to talk about um today's topic for this episode, which is data ownership, sovereignty, and democracy, that we forgot to actually introduce it. So here I am doing exactly that. So welcome and I hope you enjoy this panic with a purpose episode. Pornography data or not. I think the first question is like, why does that data matter at all? Because then you see like people, I've spoken to people in the past for like, oh, you know, I don't give a shit. They can have, you know, I don't care, I don't have nothing to hide, they can have my data, and I'm like, mmm, I don't know if the consequences and the implications or the applications, right, of any type of data should be in the hands of somebody else, even if you have nothing to hide. People change, people evolve, but also, you know, um, what you were saying before, not in this conversation, but like on our little notes talk, is that data hides more than it reveals, uh, a lot of the times. So yeah, why does data even matter? And in this context, environmental, climate, social, market. I'm gonna open that up to you.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

Because I'm still on the board thing.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah. Excellent. Yes. And I and I have moved on completely. No worries. I think that is a great question, especially what you said about like the number of people that are out there that have that reaction of, oh, they can take all my data, I got nothing to hide. I think that people don't understand what data actually does hold and what happens with data. And I I've been in a lot of rooms where people are just even focusing on specific data issues, like uh talking about energy use. People are like, oh, why would I care if my utility information is out there? If all of my data about when I am using power, how much power I am using. To some extent, it doesn't matter, where it's like, that is it's great. That's environmental data. That's something that would be helpful for figuring out when people are using energy and how to reduce energy use over time. But at the same time, there is so much that you can start to grok from that information about like, oh, hey, I see your utility bill has gone up a little bit. It looks like you got a new appliance. That's really interesting. I noticed that you're normally not home at these times, but now I can see you are home at these times because your power usage is going up at these times. How interesting is that? All of these information can start to track together. Oh, I noticed that between seven and eight on these days, you are always home and the TV is on. That means you must be watching this show. There is so much information you can start to grok all of a sudden from what feels like basic information. But on the environmental side, it's like, well, no, if we had all of this data open source, maybe we could make better decisions about how we're using energy and how to use renewable energy and things like that.

SPEAKER_00

I from what you were saying, I think it's when if I can ref rephrase so that I can see if I understand what you said correctly, is each data point by itself, when we're talking about like energy usage, for example, um, that is being monitored, um is harmless. But when it's strung together with other data that's being tracked, like your uh location on your phone, your IP, when you log in to specific devices, where you are, and then this is how marketers also like um gain access to your behavior, right? Is whose device is close by, and then guessing from who you're actually in the vicinity of, you generally get uh customized ads. You know, given that, oh, if you're friends with this person who likes, I don't know, chocolate ice cream, then you must like chocolate ice cream or chocolate products, which means you might be in the same age range or whatever, whatever it is. Um, and that can be really dangerous, not inherently because of the data itself, but because it's not transparent and honest in terms of informing the end user of how their data is being used and by whom. Is that right? Absolutely. So then um in terms of environmental data, when you said, hey, we have we need to make it more transparent so that we can take more action, I think we actually have so much data that it's paralyzing like decision makers, um heads of states, uh legislators, right? Um even people in in the private sector uh corporations, there seems to never be enough data. And so where's that balance? You know, why is there an impression that we don't have enough data? And at the same time, if we do have a lot of data, maybe it's fragmented, and then thus we can't make any decisions and beyond that any action towards um climate justice, or even beyond climate justice, you know, like just preserving our planet because we have limited resources.

SPEAKER_02

That's one of the more terrifying to things to me in the space that we do have this propensity to we just need to collect more data, we need to collect more information, and then we'll be able to act. I think to your point about like this is an issue for climate change at large, it is this attitude that we, in order to stop climate change, we feel like we need to make the perfect choice. You know, EVs are not going to stop climate change, yeah, but they are maybe part of the solution. People always think that we just need to figure out what the next big thing is, we just need to have a little bit more data. Um, and that brings in that question of uncertainty that people feel too, of like, you know, the argument that the the climate has always been changing. We don't have that much data about what climate used to be, and so we don't know for sure if this is actually a climate catastrophe or if this is just the climate being the climate and this is just regular fluctuation. We just need to have perfect data.

SPEAKER_00

Ah, fuck those guys.

SPEAKER_02

The combination of scientists that have this propensity to say, you know, we don't know anything. Science is all about like we are making inferences based off the data that we have and the information that we're gathering, and taking that and running with it and saying, well, then we don't have enough data and we should just keep digging until we are sure, because the implications for giving up fossil fuels are too large and would save the planet. So that's a problem.

SPEAKER_00

I think it's like, okay, wait, I'm getting frustrated because you are a hundred percent correct, and there is maybe there's this, okay. I will not out myself as a control freak because I feel like I've progressed in the past two decades. But I do understand the human need to like be sure, be certain, and like control every external aspect because what if we're wrong and it costs us our time, our energy, our money, right? Um, and especially with the way that we've set up um the economic incentives of GDP is one of the only measures of true progress and growth, there's always exponentially more to strive for, and so the risks are inherently higher. Now, do I fully understand why the we perceive the risk of economic like deterioration higher than the risk of like being wiped off the face of the planet? I don't know. Like, what the fuck? Um, but do you think this is then an issue? Because it's like two sides of the same coin, you know. Uh um, do you think the issue is maybe trust from academia science versus the people who might need or want to implement against this sort of data? If we're talking about environmental data, but environmental data, we should probably define this actually. What is environmental data? Because it's so all-encompassing, but we'll circle back before I'd love to hear your thoughts.

SPEAKER_02

I think trust is a really interesting word when it comes to environmental data. And I think that's a really good question that I would love the answer to. I think that trust is something that is eroded in a big way for it a lot of people between people in the government, people in scientists, people in tech. I think that we consistently have this antagonistic feeling of trying to do what we must to keep ourselves afloat. And as a result, we are we are defensive. Um, I was talking to somebody recently about um, you know, Captain Planet, the old TV show Captain Planet, where there is this large green dude who is yeah, the the team that is trying to save the planet, and often those shows are depicting an antagonist as like big oil, and they're just making big oil into like these big guys that you can punch. Um, and a lot of the times that is the easiest way to tell those kinds of stories, especially to kids that are just interested in the big people with the colorful, colorful outfits. But there are also the reality of people that when they try to come to terms with some of those characteristics and stories that are being told, there are people that work in the fossil fuel industry that are like, I can't afford to pay rent, I can't afford my health care, and you are telling me that I'm destroying the planet by doing my job. And so that trust feels like it erodes so quickly because we are all on this back foot and fighting to survive. People want to want to prove that they deserve to live. When at the end of the day, what we're trying to say with this environmental data is that, like, yes, we all deserve to live. And what we are seeing is that the decisions that larger corporations are making is actually the thing that is trying to kill all of us together. It is this antagonistic feeling of survival that is pitting us against each other when we don't need to be. That is how I feel.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I mean, like I I think, yeah, I'm inclined to agree with you because it seems like you have you're pitting sides, right? And really there isn't a side, there's just humanity and planet, and we should try to cultivate, like we as human beings, if we're, you know, if I can assume, I'm not gonna assume this is the reality, we have huge egos. And um, if we do have that huge ego, and the noble thing is like, fuck okay, don't save the planet because you know you care about it, is because your ego is so huge that you want to, you know, have dominion over the planet and therefore fucking protect your resources. Damn. It's and you know, when you're seeing okay, um, fossil fuel people working in fossil fuel, and and we're not saying execs because listen, they're like um, you know, like rig workers, people who are like uh doing logistics, for example, is the people who have the least security or feel the right. Um and then plus that social pressure and economic pressure that they have, because usually they're underpaid for what they do, um, and fossil fuel still powers like most of the world and renewables are catching up really quickly, but not yet as fast for us to completely flip the switch to, you know, 100% no-burning versus 100% renewable. Which is why I think the work that the circle economy and the ILO and a lot of other nonprofits are doing for the just transition is so important because it tries to ensure that this sort of labor or labor workforce from fossil fuel has the skills to adapt with the energy transition, as well as just like climate transition into different roles within the same sector, they could stay in energy, or they could adopt like other skill sets to go beyond energy, for example, into um education, into more white-collar jobs, etc. So it's just like you know, with the invention of the internet and the computer and any technological advances, and now I guess with AI or generative AI, is we need to upscale. We need to upscale massively, and we need to do it in a way where it doesn't continue to discriminate and um create larger disparities between the working classes so that we can offer security as we transition into a better time on our planet. Okay, you're trying to talk. I'm like, my brain is no, that was excellent. I mean, this is a weird monkey with symbols.

SPEAKER_02

This is good. We just keep going. There is something about like trying to have a conversation, but also trying to structure it that is so hard.

SPEAKER_00

Um, yeah, maybe we should fuck the structure. And by the way, it's not scripted, but we're just like very excited about how much work we put into the research.

SPEAKER_02

We've tried to read so much, and we just are like, how do we talk about everything that we care about in 45 minutes maximum?

SPEAKER_00

We're losing it, but it's fine. It's fine. If you're still here with us, thank you so much for your support. Please send us emotional support stuffed animals.

SPEAKER_02

We've been sponsored by Mother Earth. Please support her.

SPEAKER_00

Yes, please.

SPEAKER_02

Um, maybe we should define. I think to your point, we should probably define what we're talking about with environmental data. And then I also want to get your feelings on like, what is the level of panic that we feel around how how we as the human race relate to environmental data as a whole? But let's start with the first one. Like, how do we define environmental data? Climate data, environmental data.

SPEAKER_00

Wait, you want me to answer that? Damn.

SPEAKER_02

I know, right? I did those guys. Let's go.

SPEAKER_00

How do we define in? This is like, I don't like labels, is my answer.

SPEAKER_02

Yes, I know that's the worst part. Is like the both words are kind of crazy. Everything is the environment and everything is data.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02

Especially like if we expand it out and we're like climate data, everything is climate, everything is data.

SPEAKER_00

I'm gonna start with the easy one, which I feel is data. And I definitely shouldn't teach because simplifying this is a struggle. If we're starting with data, data to me means any set of as objectively factual quantitative or qualitative pieces of information. So it could be pulled from a study rigorous, perhaps we're not, we're not gonna like question integrity at this time. Or it could, to me, like knowledge, for example, right? Something something that's like passed on and then codified in some formal way, like for example, uh oral history, and then it's codified in on the internet or in a book or in a library, or like in a movie or in a video, to me, that's data. Now, I don't know if people listening um or you would actually agree with such a broad term, but I think it's really important that I emphasize that it has to be codified into some sort of formal way where it can be used and passed on or shared. So it's not like you know, I was watching LinkedIn Lawyer, it's not like hearsay, it's not like if I say something and then I'm talking to you about it, and then you regurgitate it and it's like that's not data, you know. Um, it could be gossip. Do we gossip about data? Maybe, but it it that doesn't take the form of data for me. So yes, it's still nebulous, but it's formalized. Now, when we talk about environmental data, it's a little bit more scary to me because immediately as a um person that is in this sector, and I put sector in quotation points because the climate is in everything, in every sector, it's not its own sector, right? Um then I would say that environmental, anything environmental data related is anything that would inherently impact human rights or planetary rights. Which again broad stroke. So let's say um the porn data that we were telling meta recording, whatever the fuck, or okay, a different example. I'm so sorry, guys. Uh, meta glasses, a lot of influencers are using them to review food in restaurants, right? To me, that's not environmental data unless it's put into context that relates to, I don't know, the economic well-being of a specific region that is using specific types of resources to continue to grow. So when it's clumped together like that, that's environmental data. Like, but recording a mom and pop shop and it's a food review, to me, that's I don't know, just content or entertainment.

SPEAKER_02

I like that. I think that's that was I that was a great response. I really liked that. I'm here for it. It sounds like you're saying information that is codified, and then context is what places it back in that form of climate or environmental data in particular.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, you said that in three words.

SPEAKER_02

I'm a fan.

SPEAKER_00

How did you do that?

SPEAKER_02

Yeah, I just listened to you talk and then I decided to summarize. That's why I made you go first, is I just got to take that and like bring it in. We used to do this activity for students where we would try to get them to guess what the real definition on Merriam Webster of data was, and it was one of my favorite activities because it sucks. Oh, it sucks so much, and everybody walks away like, oh god, because everybody's mad at the end. That's why it sucks.

SPEAKER_00

Girl, what's the definition? Yes, thank you.

SPEAKER_02

You ready?

SPEAKER_00

Yes.

SPEAKER_02

We have two options. One of these is fake, one of these is real. The first definition is data is factual information, such as measurements or statistics, used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, and calculation. That's number one.

SPEAKER_00

Okay.

SPEAKER_02

The second one is information that is output by a sensing device or organ and that must be processed to be meaningful.

SPEAKER_00

Can both of those be wrong?

SPEAKER_02

What a good question. The key part of two of these is the very first one, it defines the very first thing it says about what data is is it is factual information, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. The second one it says information, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, that must be processed to be meaningful.

SPEAKER_00

Given what I said, I feel like the second one. Should be the correct one.

SPEAKER_02

And most people would agree. Most people would agree. And this is what makes people mad is both of these definitions are in the Merriam-Webster dictionary for defining data. They're both true. They are both how data is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary. The second one has got the philosophy tag next to it, just to make it even more frustrating. I hear Philosophical data has to be interpreted, but regular data, facts. Facts straight up.

SPEAKER_00

Okay, well, then maybe that's this begs the question of why the data is important at all, because if we can't even agree on the definition of data, and by the way, it's not just because of the dictionary and the conversation between the two of us who work in the sector, there are a lot of stakeholders that don't are not experts in neither data nor climate or justice who are working on you know these problems or these challenges. So why is that so why is data held at such significance where it's paralyzing us from taking any action or meaningful action?

SPEAKER_02

It feels like we can choose the definition that we want to make it useful, and that's exactly what corporations are doing, is they are choosing when it should be paralyzing and when it's just enough information that they should move forward with what they want. And that is crazy.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I would that that's inherently human, right? Because why would you not do something that's advantageous, clearly, to your own interests as you know, an organization or an individual? So if this is the case, who do you think needs to have yeah, ownership or purview, or I guess any power over data and who gets the controller, right? Because we produce data. Our data is being sold and bought all the time as individuals and as companies and organizations as well. But right now, off the top of my head, it seems like most of the control is in uh organized structures that are not beneficial to individual humans.

SPEAKER_02

I think that this is like this framing, I think is the the thing that is the most terrifying to me. When we talk about, you know, how much do you panic about data and its relationship to people? I think power is the thing that makes me the most panic. Because when you think about the the current structure of power around data, that is that puts my panic up here rather than down here. Because to your point, the current structures of data are very much embedded in government entities and in large corporations that have this power to control a lot of the data that is coming in that is generated at all and where it is going, how it is being used. I think, in particular, in the past, I've done research on how to take things like Google search data and apply it to different environmental contexts. And that felt like a really fun, cool idea for detecting environmental hazards to be able to say, hey, there's something going on in this community that is bad because everybody is Googling what's wrong with my water, something's going on with my home. Those kinds of information feel like they could be super helpful. I'm getting that information from Google, from a large entity that has created a product that as a result tracks data, shares data, uses data, and doesn't tell us about how they're doing any of those things. So I have this very surface level of information about the data that is out there, and I'm trying to apply it to some level of good. And at the same time, that data is being owned by this large corporation that is doing deep, deep, deep research about how they can get more data and use that data to advertise to you better. That feels like a crazy thing when we're saying that data is important and environmental data could save the world and we need more of it when we don't have any idea how much we even have because of the power structures that are in place now.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, and it's all very obscure and opaque, right? So, okay, my panic level just reached like an all-time high.

SPEAKER_01

Welcome. Join me.

SPEAKER_00

Thank you. I would argue that this is probably power dynamics and just power over data is the same as power with anything in society, right? Uh, over resources or just power in itself, right? Influence um, because it can impact your quality of life, your job security, you know, you can be homeless in like two seconds if you get laid off because of uh the rate of inflation and how infrastructure is, especially in the US and in countries that are not supporting the social systems. Um, but to what you say, how do we balance, like, okay, trying to like educate ourselves getting all of this data, but then having no idea how much data we actually have? Does that actually even matter? Right, because then I think it loops us back around to we have so much data, let's let's figure out like investigate how much data we have. In the meanwhile, climate crisis continues to accelerate, and we're still not doing uh any sort of impactful, by the way, broad strokes, because there are a lot of cool things happening that are insanely impactful, regardless of this panicking mode that we're in. But I think maybe I'm more inclined to think of it this way is I don't care how much data is out there because I don't think I I, as an individual, can control how much Google, Microsoft, um, you know, fucking Ellison um corporation has already of our data, my data, individual and all. But from this day forward, I want control and ownership over what is rightfully mine as a citizen of the world and a human being, and my personal data that I continue to generate because it's not like we stop generating data today, right? Especially with the tech we're using. So for me, I'm like, okay, the actual question is who now has sovereignty and how do we dictate that sovereignty in order to continue an actionable path, right? The actionable motherfucking Christ, the the pathway um of what happens, data that becomes meaningful and knowledgeable turns into action. Bro.

SPEAKER_02

Bro.

unknown

No.

SPEAKER_02

Straight up, that pulls me off that ledge a little bit though. Like, I think that the the fear that I have stems from this feeling of, you know, there is an uncontrollable amount of data that I have no power over because somebody else has dictated how they are going to extract from me.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02

I feel powerless as a result of that. But to your point, there are certain levels of power that I have as an individual to control the data that is in my realm. There are regulations out there that say I can dictate what data people are taking from me that I can ask to be forgotten and have data deleted or to have it modified to more correctly represent me. And like that is something that I could actionably do. Like I could go online and look at how to do each of these processes. And I think that it reminds me too that there are, because data is such a broad definition, like I am talking about the forms of data that people with, or not people, but entities, entities with people that have more power than me are dictating what data is and what data they're collecting. I can also define data for myself and start to reshape the stories that are being told by that data. And for me, that means, you know, I'm living in a community that has an environment, and there are lots of environmental data that exists out there and lots of other data sets that exist out there about my community. But I can also generate new data and information and put it out into the world in whatever way I see fit. If there is a story that's being told by the data that exists right now, and I want to counter that story, it's easy to create something that is a form of data that can be shared, that can be shared openly, and that can help to tell those stories. I think that one of those things is uh somewhat climate-related, but like affordable housing is a big issue where I am in California. And there are a lot of stories about what it means to build new affordable housing, what it means to build the kind of housing that people could actually live in, that they could afford to live in, especially students or people that are lower income. And those stories are often dictated by real estate companies that have lots of money and are able to do lots of advertising and collect lots of information and engage with people that they know are going to agree with not wanting to have affordable housing units. I can very easily tell a different story and talk to people who are looking for affordable housing and tell their story and show data on those people. That's something that I could do just walking down the street. I could talk to people, I can interview them, I could write down how they are feeling, and I can publish that as a journal article, I could publish it as a data set, I can publish it in a lot of different ways that is suddenly counterfactual. And then I'm generating data on a small level that is counterfactual to the large data set that's out there. And I can't publish to all of Google and like beat them in that sense, but for my community, that is something that people would actually see and would actually engage with too. Soapbox done.

SPEAKER_00

I would I would say I like I really like that example. Is I would argue it's not a small thing, you know, and there's that's why social media is so powerful because it actually gives a level of access and transparency. Of course, there's the algorithm, but um, that people would not otherwise have experience or um the privilege to, is it a privilege? I don't know, the privilege to choose to pay attention to, right? And you see all of these like hope core sort of videos, I'm always on them and I'm crying all the time. But it gives me so much um warmth, kind of away from the panic. So when people are like, Oh, are you doom scrolling? And I'm like, no, I am hope scrolling.

SPEAKER_02

I'm hope scrolling. Excellent.

SPEAKER_00

Giving my like dose, you know, I need my fix so I can carry on. Um, and and I think, and I would argue also, you know, when you're talking about, oh, maybe the housing, you know, because you're in California situation or crisis, in fact, uh, is not climate related. It actually is, because if you take kind of circle back to our economic model that focuses on GDP, basically exponential growth, right? Um, and then consider something like donut economics, where um I will put this resource in B.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah, tell me more. What's donut economics? Give me more.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, very simplified two seconds is the model has two rings. And I'm pretty sure I'm gonna actually describe this wrong because I'm a visual thinker. Um basically in the inner ring is what you have as the basic human needs: housing, food, access to fair access to like natural resources, water, etc. And in the outer ring, so it's like a donut because there's a hole in the um in the outer ring are all of the planetary boundaries that we can't supersede because of the limited resources that we do have on the planet. And so what we should be considering instead of GDP is if all of those needs are met and we continue to grow um in a maybe not a degrowth, but in a regenerative growth structure within our planetary boundaries, no one gets left behind in the whole. So in that sense, housing is super important to be worked on, even if it's not on its own classified as classified as a climate. I don't know how to use air quotation marks. Air quotation marks are hard um as a climate issue, but it's a human rights issue which automatically makes it a planetary rights issue. Right? Because how can we, when we were talking about blue-collar versus you know uh white-collar jobs, uh worry, maybe not we because we're checking our privileged here, right? Families or or people working who are going paycheck by paycheck, they have to put the kids through school, like uh who emigrated for the safety of their family and their children in a new country. They have no fucking time to worry about this, and that's okay so long as there are um people who are privileged, like us, the government who needs to be accountable, who needs to hold the private sector accountable, to build one affordable housing, to create uh social systems that um empower but also support, you know, like rehabilitating, for example, homeless people or people who've been in um incarcerated back into society, or people who simply like had to drop out of school to go to work or to feed their parents to survive, right? Or the people who got abducted, their parents got abducted by fucking ice. Yeah. But, anyways, my point is uh that we need to reevaluate our economic model, and there are already nations and countries, um, nations are countries, hello, that are already adopting this. So, with all of this panic, and we did touch on sovereignty, right? Ownership, although we didn't answer who should be what, I think we should maybe shift gears to what the fuck should we be doing about all of this? Right? Maybe we start with the role of maybe we talked about the individual a lot, but the role of the state. Um what is their role? Because you know, we shouldn't all individually, it's like the fucking recycling problem.

SPEAKER_02

You need to recycle, except that's just propaganda, or the only reason that the planet is burning is because you forgot to put that plastic bottle in the blue bin 13 years ago. It's your fault.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, and it was shipped to like Malaysia to be sat in a landfill. So, you know, like very cool.

SPEAKER_02

We're in good shape. Um, I think that it's a good point that thinking about reshaping the economic system to be more conducive to being able to handle the climate problem and to handle all of these socially important issues in a way that is going to make space for these kinds of conversations, too. I think that when you talk about what we can actually do to reduce that panic and getting towards what the role of government is and policymakers, that is a subject that always makes me kind of mad. I think when it comes to the subject of data in particular, because obviously we can't talk about, we've got a whole podcast to talk about how government should play a role in in fixing the climate at large, but in the context of data, I think that there are regulations that are out there for the state of California, for the European Union that are trying to give back some respect of data ownership to people to protect the individual. But then I think that there is this question of the environmental data, of the climate data, and how we are trying to balance this push towards solving the climate crisis by collecting data that can inform our actions, not collecting so much more data that we need to know everything about the climate, but enough that we can say this is the next thing that we need to address, or this is the next major issue around climate that is staring us in the face that we should jump into right away. You know, what's the next ozone layer? Having those kinds of data is important, but the that fine line that is being walked there with, you know, we let's continue to have environmental regulatory data being collected and being mandated in some capacity, and let's avoid getting into this realm of surveillance of data collection, collecting information about the environment in the world in order to get towards the climate solutions we're interested in, and somehow also not focusing on trying to track people who are migrating across borders using that same exact data. I think that gets to be a very fine issue, a very fine line.

SPEAKER_00

It is, yeah. No, I agree with you. I think it is a fine line, but it's also very idealistic, maybe or naive of us to assume that all people or the majority of people in positions currently in positions of power in state or state agencies will not abuse and or think of using that data that is already being collected for surveillance or nefarious reasons, also because they're lobbying shouldn't exist, but anyway, so you know, like big tech lobbies, right? Um who have more uh budget than most states, like nation states. And so how can, you know, uh we as grassroots movements or um even smaller agencies or people working, you know, good people working in the state um combat against this because it's about the power of financing and thus like influence, right? So I wonder when we talk about climate data um or environmental data, is if we should completely um privatize in a co-op model any data that continues to be produced. Um hosted on like local servers. Um and we've done it before in the past, we can do it again if they're not going to take responsibility and accountability for their citizens, we will do it. Right? Take to the streets. Um so that the so then then it builds like, hey, we can do it, we've done it, and then build the pressure of you need to take responsibility for this. Now, I must say, you know, the time has come and people are stepping up, people, you know, individuals who are community members, not people who just want to lead communities, right? Um, who just want to be politicians, people who actually want to do good and then assume positions or are voted um into positions of um in the political structure. So I think my point is if we take it into the private sector but in co-op and grassroots movements, it will actually re-feed into, you know, like the systemic structure and rebuild it into something that flourishes because then we're building capacity for leaders and you know, like mom daddy, who probably already exists but needs the um support, needs to understand the opportunities that they have to ascend or step up to the civic responsibility rules, and that doesn't have to be one singular individual, it could be many people in a community, and that feeds up on the county-state, you know, um, country level.

SPEAKER_02

I am, I'm, I like this. I like this a lot. Breathe. I like what you're saying, and it also it's giving me this image um that I think is is bringing it home for me. I I have that panic of giving government any more control over data collection can be a scary thing. And I think that this is the trauma that I'm experiencing as somebody living in the US right now that is watching all of my favorite environmental data sets be tear asunder, torn asunder, watching all of my environmental data sets be torn asunder. Um, so it's that fear that I have that that's stemming from. But this idea of moving this kind of data ownership away from government and back to the community is something that warms my heart. And also I can see it, I can see that vision of it feeding back to government at the end of the day, rather than placing this ownership of the data in the hands of the government to begin with and giving them the responsibility of generating these things, owning these things, maintaining them, taking it back to community members who can have a say in this data is helpful, it is representative, these are the ways that it should be applied. Having that power in that space means that there is now this ability to move towards these end goals that may not be the direct purpose of that data in the first place, but is still socially beneficial for the people in these communities. Whereas government can take data and apply it to different scenarios that are going to be beneficial in their eyes, that can be harmful, that can be very detrimental. Having it in the hands of the community means that we can start to reveal things that are actually needed for these people. And that idea of having community ownership be the primary point of this data and giving government the space to aid in that process. By saying, hey, we've also got these collection methods that we can feed into that, but you get to keep ownership. That feels like something that is not only feasible, I could see that that absolutely being an existing system, but it also gives rise to community leadership, to your point. You get the mom domnies of the world because these are people that are experiencing what it means to have power as a community member and to see a path forward for leadership and change in your own community. That's so cool. I like that. No, but it reminds me of like there's the organizations out there, like the Environmental Data Governance Initiative, which is under the Public Environmental Data Partnership. Got it, got the names. That is so focused on like, hey, the government had all these great environmental data sets, and under the Trump administration, they're tearing it down. So we're gonna put it back up, we're gonna change it, we're gonna make it better, and we're gonna solicit feedback from communities about is this environmental justice map actually representing you, or is this wrong? And how can we improve it? That opportunity to suddenly build it again.

SPEAKER_00

I think that's a great example because you know, like that initiative, like many more that is coming in, has you know come out of not just the defunding by the Trump administration, but just all over the world, especially when you're looking at the privilege of the global north extracting data from the global south, creating technologies, innovations with that data, and then not giving it back to the global south. Uh, and then you also have brain drain because of that, you know, from uh nations that are a bit less developed or economically developed. Um means that with what you're describing, we're able to ensure relevance and usability by connecting the collectors with the end users and vice versa, so that it's a living and breathing organism, data governance and structures rather than something that's stagnated and that's 100% either forgotten or controlled by governments. So I feel in this sense the state should act as a facilitator, a financier, um, capacity, health capacity building, right? For communities to have or continue to have sovereign, continue to have, maybe we've never had it, but um sovereignty over data. So I think perhaps actually everything that we've talked about, if we can help the listeners or the watchers um summarize is pulling from you know like the new framework and and all of our thinking is that the actions or the path forward is access of data without gatekeeping. Right. So public environmental data enables justice in all of its form for planetary and human rights. Um yes, we acknowledge it also maybe enables oppression, but there's risk in everything. Um, and and I believe I have hope, I have faith in humanity. And um so instead of restricting the access that we have to environmental data and who has power to like take the action, community-led white box determine the visibility of all of this data, which means we'll have opportunity, better opportunity to actually create a good impact. Second point is coordination, which is what we just talked about by community-led governance, uh data within its context. Then that allows clearer pathways to action, right? And then um, and then the fourth would be power distribution or redistribution and information sharing, right? Who controls the data? Sovereignty requires community ownership of the tools, economic models where data creators benefit from the value generated by that data, global south, global north, also within uh economic structures in the same society, and governant uh governance models where affected communities also make the decisions with that data. Okay, access without gatekeeping, coordination on all fronts, clear pathways to action, power redistribution, and information sharing. Thank you, good night. I'm done. Thank you, and good night.

SPEAKER_02

Well done. I think that put a very good point on it. We have joy, we have joy. I like I like this. I feel, I don't know about you, but I feel like my panic level, and I know that like we we did research, we were preparing for these conversations, like we think about these things all the time, we talk about these things all the time. My panic level doesn't usually go down at the end of our conversations. I think that this format that we have, where we are actually trying to not only label our anxieties in the panic that we're feeling, but getting towards this end goal of why could we be less panicked? What could the future look like? What can we imagine as being something that would be different, regenerative and liberatory versus just more of the same and get out there and vote? You know? It feels like we've actually got some path forward. I can see this future for the first time, and my panic is going from here like back down to here. It's still panicked. We're like at a four out of a ten, but we're not at like a nine out of ten, you know what I mean? I'm worried, but in worry and vote. Yeah, straight up. Isn't it?

SPEAKER_00

I don't know, maybe. Um I agree with you, and also like, you know, the reason that we started this podcast is not really for the sake of starting a podcast, it's just spend time with each other and and talk about the things that are interesting to us, but also figuring out ways where we can individually take, you know, we have agency, take some sort of action. And uh on just on the tail of what you said about like our excitement and doing all of this research is um I just wanted to inform everyone that's here with us today that we will be publishing a couple of articles to release all of the information that we have gathered, um, and also um to release some kind of action packets of what you could potentially do if you're located in the global north, the global south, if you're indigenous, and hopefully um with examples of what's already being done and links um that will inspire you to take action or hold fire under asses of people who fucking need to be doing their jobs.

SPEAKER_02

Ass fire. Let's go.

SPEAKER_00

I've got the gasoline, that's the only thing petroleum is good for.

SPEAKER_02

Yo, yo, hold up. That's on a t-shirt right now. That's gotta be that's gotta be on a t-shirt right now. Go to the new data shop that doesn't exist and buy that t-shirt immediately.

SPEAKER_00

Wait, let us know if you would like to buy that.

SPEAKER_02

We will just literally I might get that tattooed on my face.

SPEAKER_00

You know, I know we'll do the whole thing. Oh, thank you for listening, but thank you for listening.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah, thank you for listening. Before, thank you for listening. You absolutely showed up with us. I I hope that at the end of the day, I hope that we're making this feeling of people getting to be less panicked. I hope that you get to panic with us for a moment and enjoy watching us flail for a little bit. And then I hope that you also are feeling a little bit of hope. And even if your panic level is going down by one level and not four levels, that is still a step in the right direction.

SPEAKER_00

Okay. I mean, that's a wrap.

SPEAKER_02

Did it.

SPEAKER_00

Okay, bye.

SPEAKER_01

Bye.

SPEAKER_00

That's a wrap on today's episode of Panic With a Purpose. Remember, your climate anxiety is valid, but it's also fuel. Use it. If today's conversation sparks something in you, whether that's hope, rage, or just more questions, send us a message. Written, audio, video, interpretive, dance. We're here for it all. Until next time, keep panicking with purpose.