Caminos — a living atlas of how change is made

MVMinisterie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid (Estado neerlandés, con UWV y Belastingdienst)government PBPlatform Bescherming Burgerrechtenngo TWTijmen Wisman PAPhilip Alston MVMarvin van Bekkum FZFrederik Zuiderveen Borgesius

Part of this project? Claim your place

01 The context

It was applied mainly in low-income and minority neighborhoods. A civil rights coalition led by Platform Bescherming Burgerrechten sued it ('Bij Voorbaat Verdacht' campaign). On February 5, 2020 the court of The Hague ordered it to be halted for violating art. 8 of the ECHR, due to lack of transparency and insufficient safeguards.

02 How it works

method · Algorithmic risk modelmethod · Fraud detection through data cross-referencing (data matching)tool · SyRI system (state risk indication engine)

03 What it stands on

Evidence level

Own experience

Grounded in published theory

Documented evidence elsewhere

Independently evaluated here

Peer-reviewed research documents this project: the strongest evidence level in the atlas.

The evidence 2 ›

EvidenceLandmark ruling by Dutch court stops government attempts to spy on the poor – UN expertOHCHR (Naciones Unidas) · 2020

EvidenceDigital welfare fraud detection and the Dutch SyRI judgmentEuropean Journal of Social Security, vol. 23(4), 323-340 · 2021

04 Lessons learned

An opaque risk model applied to poor neighborhoods discriminates and erodes trust; the opacity made it impossible even to verify whether the algorithm was discriminatory. Simple, transparent preventive controls are more effective and proportionate than mass surveillance. The ruling forced UWV and the tax authority to reassess their algorithmic systems and fueled the debate that preceded the benefits scandal (toeslagenaffaire).