Abstract
This article examines the fingerprint biometric technology adopted by Ghana to enhance its electoral integrity and argues that although this technology is touted to be value-neutral, objective, and accurate, it is inherently discriminatory. Reports show that the biometric rejected those individuals who are engaged in “slash-and-burn agriculture.” Therefore, the mass subjection of elections to the logic of the biometric technology in resource-mismanaged contexts is welcoming, but its use raises social justice and localization concerns.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 361-375 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Technical Communication Quarterly |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 2 2019 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2019, © 2019 Association of Teachers of Technical Writing.
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Keywords
- Election technology
- Ghana
- fingerprint biometric
- localization
- social justice
- user experience
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Risky Election, Vulnerable Technology: Localizing Biometric Use in Elections for the Sake of Justice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS