What is the issue?
Technological developments are reshaping security sector governance, bringing both opportunities and challenges. Examples include artificial intelligence (AI), biometrics and machine learning (ML), as well as systems enhancing surveillance capabilities, including satellites.
How did we help?
To further understand the implications of leveraging technological solutions to support security sector governance activities, RAND Europe conducted a scoping study on behalf of the Security and Stabilisation Department of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). Part of the ‘Engagement and Research Project on Contemporary Stabilisation and Security Challenges’, the project explored the following research questions:
- How are security actors adopting and deploying new technologies within Security Sector Governance and Management (SSG/M)?
- How do these emerging technologies support SSG/M objectives in relation to fairness, accountability, legitimacy and good management?
- What risks emerge from the adoption of new technologies in SSG/M across different countries, including fragile, near-conflict and authoritarian settings?
- What lessons learnt and good practices can be identified from the adoption of new technologies in SSG/M and how can they inform UK policy and practice?
The research employed a mixed-methods approach comprising a literature review, stakeholder interviews and a workshop to understand how technologies are used by security sector actors, particularly in relation to public acceptability, institutional accountability, financial sustainability and ethical considerations.
What did we find?
The research identifies nine technology areas holding promise for security sector governance actors:
- Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality (AR/VR)
- Automated decision support
- Biometrics
- Blockchain
- Digital ID platforms
- Data management solutions
- Satellite imagery
- Social media monitoring
- Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)
These solutions can provide gains in efficiency, effectiveness, situational awareness, and, where designed transparently, strengthened accountability and traceability. However, there are also cross-cutting risks to consider: privacy and data-protection concerns, algorithmic bias and opaque models, cybersecurity and data-sovereignty vulnerabilities, exclusion of digitally marginalised groups, and diluted accountability when private vendors or automated systems shape decisions.
Six cross-cutting practices were identified to embed governance into the full technology lifecycle in the context of SSG/M:
- Co-design with end users and communities to ensure fit-for-purpose tools and accountability
- Justify and adapt adoption to local context, infrastructure and perceptions, anticipating misuse
- Assess need and balance risk appetite and tolerance, including lifecycle costs, while governing data provenance, ownership and cross-border sharing
- Move beyond human-in-the-loop to multilayered oversight that counters automation bias, allows time to intervene and clarifies responsibility
- Pair internal policies with external regulation and oversight (transparent approvals, logging/auditing, public consultation and after-action reviews) for accountability
- Provide continuous and dedicated training for operators and leaders to support the use of technologies in SSG/M.
What can be done?
- There is a need to bring key stakeholders together, including private-sector companies developing technological solutions as well as state and non-state actors involved in the delivery and management of security services. Relevant actors from adjacent sectors who are also using these technologies, such as humanitarian or disaster-response bodies, could also benefit from widespread engagement.
- Technological solutions evolve very rapidly and often simultaneously across contexts. As a result there are limited opportunities to learn from past or ongoing experiences in other contexts in order to replicate good practices and avoid pitfalls that may have been previously identified in different settings.
- SSG/M good-governance principles should be embedded when considering the use of technologies. To do so, the principles of good governance outlined above should form part of the requirements when considering technological solutions for the provision and management of security services. In addition, the development of a risk-assessment model could be used across fragile contexts to assess the suitability of these technological solutions.
