Carnegie’s Digital Democracy Network is a diverse group of leading thinkers and activists engaged in work on technology and politics. The network is dedicated to generating original analysis and enabling cross-regional knowledge-sharing to fill critical research and policy gaps.
The Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program is a leading source of independent policy research, writing, and outreach on global democracy, conflict, and governance. It analyzes and seeks to improve international efforts to reduce democratic backsliding, mitigate conflict and violence, overcome political polarization, promote gender equality, and advance pro-democratic uses of new technologies.
Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.
Steven Feldstein
Senior Fellow, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Steven Feldstein is a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, where he focuses on technology and geopolitics, U.S. foreign policy, and the global context for democracy and human rights.
Watch videos from members of the Digital Democracy Network, learn more about the network, and meet some of its members from around the world.
By removing cloud technology firm Abr Arvan from its sanctions list, the EU has set a concerning—and puzzling—precedent.
In their new pieces, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Digital Democracy Network experts consider the growing role of technology in politics and society with insight and analysis aimed at bridging the gap between local perspectives and global conversations.
The Digital Democracy Network’s contributors offer global perspectives on digital repression trends, the role of tech platforms, digital sovereignty, and the impact of geopolitics and governance on technology.
Activists and citizens must ensure that governments respect their digital rights.
Examining these actions through alternative perspectives could illuminate often-overlooked aspects of these communication blocks.
Differing trends illustrate the fluidity of global AI technology competition and how future alignments will not necessarily be defined by two-country competition between the United States and China.
As governments find more effective ways to carry out internet shutdowns, citizens and democracies need more effective ways to combat them.
Global political trends in recent years have put to rest any illusions that the relationship between technological innovation and progress in democratic politics would be largely positive. Digital technology is disrupting international politics in myriad ways.
During last week’s Russian elections, the Kremlin put two major Western tech companies on notice: remove content pushed by Putin’s foes or risk being chased out of the market. Sadly, concessions by leading tech companies to authoritarian governments are nothing new. These companies must do better.
Autocrats have bent the internet to serve anti-democratic purposes. Can democracies halt their march?
