Review of 'Building Blocks for Ubuntu Information Systems Ethics'

The study, Building Blocks for Ubuntu Information Systems Ethics, explores the underrepresented area of Africanisation and decolonisation of information systems (IS) ethics, addressing the notable absence of research in this domain. The paper seeks to answer the central research question: How can African knowledge systems and ways of knowing inform and enrich IS ethics? Through a conceptual and philosophical approach, the study integrates ethical insights from Ubuntu-informed ethics, information ethics, and business ethics, laying the groundwork for an Ubuntu-based IS ethics framework.

The study is both timely and necessary, as ethical concerns in IS have been largely dominated by Eurocentric perspectives, often overlooking Indigenous and alternative worldviews. By advocating for Ubuntu as a foundational lens, the article introduces an approach that prioritizes communal values, interconnectedness, and social responsibility, key tenets of Ubuntu philosophy. This perspective broadens ethical discourse in IS and aligns with global movements towards inclusive and context-aware technological development.

I have the following comments

• The introduction section presents a broad scope, covering Africanisation of IS ethics, Ubuntu ethics, business ethics, and information ethics. While the focus on Ubuntu as a lens is emphasized, there is a risk that the article attempts to cover too much ground. Consider narrowing the focus by specifying which aspects of IS ethics will be the main priority.
• There is a need to clarify competing models or perspectives (e.g., Western/global IS ethics with the Ubuntu IS ethics).
• The ‘Ubuntu is ethics’ section discusses various ethical concerns; the section could benefit from a more structured synthesis of key themes in IS ethics globally before narrowing down to the Ubuntu IS ethics perspective.

Level of Importance: (4/5)

The study is highly relevant for the academic community, particularly in the fields of IS ethics, digital ethics, and African studies. The focus on Ubuntu IS ethics offers a novel perspective that contributes to the ongoing decolonization discourse in technology and ethics. The discussion on programming language biases and AI ethical concerns provides valuable insights into how Western epistemological influences shape ICT and IS.

Level of Validity: (3/5)

The argumentation is well-reasoned, and the literature review provides a solid theoretical foundation for the claims. The value-ladenness of ICT and the Western epistemic dominance in programming are well-supported by peer-reviewed sources.

Level of Completeness: (4/5)

The study references a broad range of scholarly works, including recent and peer-reviewed sources. The integration of ethical, cultural, and technological perspectives makes the discussion comprehensive and interdisciplinary. The literature covers a wide range of IS subfields (e.g., AI ethics, programming languages, open-source, HCI, e-government).

Level of Comprehensibility: (4/5)

The writing is clear and academic, making it accessible to scholars in IS, digital ethics, and African studies. The paper follows a logical structure, covering the background, ethical concerns, and proposed Ubuntu IS ethics framework. The use of structured heuristics and guiding questions improves readability and applicability.

The study, Building Blocks for Ubuntu Information Systems Ethics, explores the underrepresented area of Africanisation and decolonisation of information systems (IS) ethics, addressing the notable absence of research in this domain. The paper seeks to answer the central research question: How can African knowledge systems and ways of knowing inform and enrich IS ethics? Through a conceptual and philosophical approach, the study integrates ethical insights from Ubuntu-informed ethics, information ethics, and business ethics, laying the groundwork for an Ubuntu-based IS ethics framework.

The study is both timely and necessary, as ethical concerns in IS have been largely dominated by Eurocentric perspectives, often overlooking Indigenous and alternative worldviews. By advocating for Ubuntu as a foundational lens, the article introduces an approach that prioritizes communal values, interconnectedness, and social responsibility, key tenets of Ubuntu philosophy. This perspective broadens ethical discourse in IS and aligns with global movements towards inclusive and context-aware technological development.

I have the following comments

• The introduction section presents a broad scope, covering Africanisation of IS ethics, Ubuntu ethics, business ethics, and information ethics. While the focus on Ubuntu as a lens is emphasized, there is a risk that the article attempts to cover too much ground. Consider narrowing the focus by specifying which aspects of IS ethics will be the main priority.
• There is a need to clarify competing models or perspectives (e.g., Western/global IS ethics with the Ubuntu IS ethics).
• The ‘Ubuntu is ethics’ section discusses various ethical concerns; the section could benefit from a more structured synthesis of key themes in IS ethics globally before narrowing down to the Ubuntu IS ethics perspective.

Level of Importance: (4/5)

The study is highly relevant for the academic community, particularly in the fields of IS ethics, digital ethics, and African studies. The focus on Ubuntu IS ethics offers a novel perspective that contributes to the ongoing decolonization discourse in technology and ethics. The discussion on programming language biases and AI ethical concerns provides valuable insights into how Western epistemological influences shape ICT and IS.

Level of Validity: (3/5)

The argumentation is well-reasoned, and the literature review provides a solid theoretical foundation for the claims. The value-ladenness of ICT and the Western epistemic dominance in programming are well-supported by peer-reviewed sources.

Level of Completeness: (4/5)

The study references a broad range of scholarly works, including recent and peer-reviewed sources. The integration of ethical, cultural, and technological perspectives makes the discussion comprehensive and interdisciplinary. The literature covers a wide range of IS subfields (e.g., AI ethics, programming languages, open-source, HCI, e-government).

Level of Comprehensibility: (4/5)

The writing is clear and academic, making it accessible to scholars in IS, digital ethics, and African studies. The paper follows a logical structure, covering the background, ethical concerns, and proposed Ubuntu IS ethics framework. The use of structured heuristics and guiding questions improves readability and applicability.