← Back to portfolio

Is technology a viable solution to the Irish border problem?

Published on


Introduction

The nature of the relationship between the outward-bound United Kingdom and the European Union following Brexit is still very uncertain. However, this December 2020 election really does feel like the conclusion to a very long prelude to Britain's exit of the European Union. YouGov, the only polling platform to predict the outcome of the 2017 election, has shown a massive 68-seat majority for Boris Johnson's Brexit-led party (Telegraph, 2019). On the other hand, one thing that is for certain is that the European Union (EU), and the governments of the United Kingdom and Ireland have stated their commitment to avoid a hard border between the Republic of Ireland (an EU Member State) and Northern Ireland (leaving the EU) at all costs (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). The existing economic and cultural ties between the two nations is well recognised. In fact, the structural symbiosis and the historical volatility between these nations is the reason why their border has to remain as frictionless as possible. The Belfast Agreement of 1998 (otherwise known as th e Good Friday Agreement) underlines this very fact: border security posts and identification requirements were removed to maintain the Common Travel Area (CTA), which is an administrative arrangement allowing UK and Irish citizens tocross the border with no passport controls. With this in mind, the EU and the UK have recognised the importance of avoiding a hard border (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017).

The Brexit border between N. Ireland and the R. of Ireland has become a major sticking point for the Conservatives since negotiations began following the referendum results in 2016. It is the only land border between the UK and the EU, leading many to believe that if an agreement isn't reached, then the default hard border, accustomed to checks and controls, could be detrimental to the economies of both nations and the livelihoods of millions. This may sound dramatic, however – in a report written to the European Parliament, it is estimated that a hard border could reduce trade by as much as €430 million per year. On top of this, delays of up to 60 minutes for lorries and 20 minutes for cars, could become customary (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). These are just a few of the potential side effects were a hard border to be put in place. So, how can the UK leave the European Union and maintain a soft border between Northern and the Republic of Ireland? The word on everyone's lips: Technology.

The Technological Solution

The automatic border resolution for any nation leaving the European Union would be to reinstate a hard border. Equipped with all the physical checks and controls, a hard border serves to ensure the security and protection of its population, as well as maintaining its international obligations to trade and travel regulations. This fact does not change for when the UK (Including N. Ireland) leaves the EU. However, both parties are working towards a solution that functions as a hard border without appearing to be one. In essence, the aforementioned security, trade and travel regulations need to be met without undermining the Irish peace process outlined in the Good Friday Agreement, which sees the free movement of people across the N. Ireland and R. of Ireland border (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). In other words, it needs to be as 'frictionless' as possible; making the border invisible on the ground and leaving legal checks to be completed elsewhere (Economist, 2019). The technological solution seems to be the only option that satisfies both parties; as the existing technology can provide the correct infrastructure, meaning both the UK and the EU can have their cake and eat it in this instance.

A 'Smart Border' is the universally recognised nomenclature for a technologically enhanced border. A Smart Border promotes the utilisation of modern technology, risk management, domestic and international cooperation, as well as adhering to the international standards set forth, to help create low friction borders (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). There is n o doubt that both the EU and the UK will explore a similar Smart Border solution for Ireland concomitantly. In fact, the European council and the UK Government have expressed their support for "imaginative and flexible solutions" (European Council, 2017), whilst also outlining their desire for "frictionless and seamless border"; avoiding physical border infrastructure on either side (HM Treasury, 2017). With this in mind, the UK and the EU will have to consider the existing technology that the Smart Border solution has to offer, such as Trusted Trader regimes (AEO's), Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). They will also consider the high potential of emerging technologies such as facial recognition services, data sharing (via blockchain) and the creation of a customs Gateway solution that could formulate the next generation of Smart Border technology (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017).

There are numerous examples around the world, and in Europe, whereby technology is fully integrated at the border. The United Kingdom must draw heavily on these examples to present a case for the use of similar technology at its only land border with the EU; between N. Ireland and the R. of Ireland. However, the finished article is likely to take years, and the specific case of the Irish border problem will require new and innovative approaches. The border will also only take shape once the UK has finalised a deal with the EU; the state of play concerning trade and customs arrangements are still uncertain. Moreover, the Irish border problem, and any subsequent solution, greatly depends on 'how' the UK plans to leave the EU; with a deal. Whether the UK seeks to maintain a customs union with the EU, or remain in the single market for goods, or remove itself from both entirely, is yet to be determined. However, if the general election renders a large Conservative majority, Boris Johnson will be at liberty to begin negotiations due to his "oven-ready" Brexit deal, which predicates a 'backstop' policy for the Irish border policy (BBC Reality Check, 2019). More on tha t later. It is clear that the UK's economic relationship with the EU will change dramatically, perhaps affecting the form and practice of their shared border indefinitely. For example, by leaving the customs union, and remaining in the single market, the border between N. Ireland and the R. of Ireland should take a very similar shape to Norway's border with Sweden.

Single market members, such as Norway, have to participate in four EU freedoms: the freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people (Bloom, J. 2017). This means that there is still a requirement for customs checks at the border. However, these checks and controls would be loose and relatively frictionless when compared to a hard border. The border between Sweden (an EU member state) and Norway (a non-EU member) is the most technologically advanced in the world to date. Their border, which stretches for 1600km from north to south, is far larger than the border between N. Ireland and the R. of Ireland and is globally recognised as a 'Smart Border'. Being part of the single market means that Norway's standards for most goods mirror those of the European Union, allowing the movement of said goods with minimum compliance controls (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). The Schengen Agreement of 1995 adv ocated for

enhanced customs cooperation between the Kingdom of Norway, and Sweden as a compromise to Sweden joining the EU. It is possible that the UK can strike a similar deal, however, the UK does not currently hold any comparable bargaining power. Nevertheless, this agreement has laid the foundations for a relatively frictionless border between a non-EU member and the rest of the EU. Currently, the Norway- Sweden border uses a host of technological systems that helps to keep the border as open as possible.

Due to the vast length of the border, Norwegian and Swedish authorities alike have found the use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) extremely useful. In 2011, ANPR cameras were set up at all border crossings that did not have physical customs posts for either nation. The cameras are used to identify suspicious vehicles and to detect customs violations (Euroactive, 2017). The ANPR system is linked to a national motor registry database that allows for customs to monitor unmanned border crossing points. Christen Hoiberget, head of section at Svinesund border (the busiest of all Norway-Sweden border crossings) claims that "trade between Norway and Sweden flourishes with the help of technology and cooperation." They have confiscated 300,000 litres of alcohol this year from smugglers who look to bring contraband into Norway (Morris, C. 2017). It has been so successful that Norwegian customs have also stated that their ANPR system could be used to allow vehicles to cross the border without stopping if they have submitted a declaration and been cleared prior to their arrival at the border (Cellen-Jones, R. 2017). 

This is known and a 'Trusted Trader' regime, or an Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) scheme. The Economist explains: "preregis tered companies, known as "trusted traders", would have to submit additional information, such as the details of the lorry being used and the person driving it." The information would be transported via the cloud to an online customs system that controls ANPR cameras. "The driver might need an enhanced license containing biometric data (facial scans, for example)" to be recognised by the cameras (Economist, 2019). And, although this may seem complex at the very least, the infrastructure does currently exist. At the US-Canada border, for example, the NEXUS programme is in place to help expediate pre- approved travellers and traders. Both the US and Canada operate an eManifest system for compulsory prearrival information from carries." Prior to arrival at the border, carriers have to submit the necessary information. The received information is processed, and a barcode is sent in return to the carrier if everything checks out. The barcode received on the carriers' mobile phone and scanned at the border. In 2015, the average waiting time for preapproved travellers (using NEXUS) was 25 seconds as opposed to 1 minute for travellers who were not preapproved. This may seem like an insignificant amount of time, but thousands of vehicles crossing the border each day, this makes a huge difference (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017).

Swedish Customs expert, Lars Karlsson referred to Trusted Traders as part of a wider 'Gateway Solution' (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). The Gateway Solution would require a cross-border, data-sharing initiative between both nations on either side of the border. This would also eliminate the need for paper documentation. For example, the documentation involved in shipping goods from one country to another is going virtual and electronic customs declarations are being made easier to submit, allowing the pre-clearance of shipments and the online payment of tariffs (Economist, 2019). This is, potentially, a major security risk, and concerns over the hacking of sensitive information have risen exponentially over the last few years. The publication of the Mueller report, which unearthed Russian interference into the US presidential election in 2016, as well as Huawei's potential involvement in Britain's 5G network, are just a few examples where data sharing has led to subsequent political uproar. Despite the security risks, a few countries are looking to digitise their borders entirely. Switzerland, for example, aims to fully digitise its border with the EU by 2026. It has set aside 400 million SFR to invest in a system known as DaziT, which will provide a central online platform for customs services, allowing "travellers [to] use smartphones and tablets to declare foreign purchases on which duties may be owed" among other things (Economist, 2019). Security of systems, such as the Brainchild of DaziT, is likely to be protected by a 'blockchain', which underpins and safeguards cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. A blockchain records transactions on a decentralised register making it difficult for hackers to gain access to for whatever means. Any future data-sharing initiative used for the resolution of the Irish border problem will use a similar security infrastructure.

vCargo, a Singapore-based tech firm is showcasing the potential of systems safeguarded by a blockchain presently. They have introduced electronic certificates of origin for goods travelling into and out of the country. A mobile phone app is used to scan a 'QR Code' attached to the goods in question. Similarly, an electronic data tracking software known as TradeLens is making headway at several major ports around the world. TradeLens was the product of a collaboration between the US computer firm, IBM, and Danish shipping company Maersk. They also use blockchain, and its benefits have been universally accepted. Blockchain is excellent at registering cargo that has been tampered with in any way, for example, "every time a code or a sensor attached to the goods is scanned, that event is logged in the blockchain and tagged with other data, such as the location of the goods" (Economist, 2019). Trackable from origin to destination; goods are extremely hard to tamper with. The potential upsides of the Gateway Solution are multiple and will draw on these case studies heavily. Its sole aim is to make border crossings as fast and frictionless as possible, whilst at the same time, maintaining the necessary, high, levels of security. However, no system is fool-proof, and the Gateway Solution will not eliminate the need for physical checks to occur at, or near the border. Some checks and controls will need to take place on the ground, to justify that the cargo 'does what it says on the tin'.

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is used to do just that. RFID exists to carry out these checks at both the US - Canada and the Norway-Sweden borders. It is a non-invasive inspection technology that ensures that no illegal smuggling operations can take advantage of the Smart Border framework. RFID reduces the need for people to leave vehicles and also reduces the need for unpacking by using scanners that determines the contents of a courier vehicle (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017). They have proven to be very successful in reducing the waiting time of lorries and providing another level of protection and surveillance. Should this be used at the Northern Ireland – Republic of Ireland border, the appearance and practice of a hard border could be greatly reduced, purveying an almost frictionless border.

Too good to be true?

Vast improvements to facial recognition, retinal scanning, and fingerprint scanning have led many to speculate that biometric data could be used to greater effect at the border. Chinese facial recognition technology has hit the headlines recently over its successful integration into a number of Chinese supermarkets. Many supermarkets across china are now using facial recognition cameras at check-out points; customers are no longer required to hand over cash or card to pay for the items they want (Business Daily, BBC Radio 4, 2019). These supermarkets use facial recognition to link a person's facial features to their specific bank account. Money is then withdrawn on the basis that the face matches the account. Moreover, AI-driven retail is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what Chinese tech firms can offer the global market. Kerry Alan, a media analyst for the BBC, believes that China is the world leader for technological innovation; edging out its western competitors. William Bow-Been, CEO of China Accelerator, an organisation that helps to mediate and/or bridge the gap between Chinese tech firms and the western market, suggests that China's success stems from its vast consumer base and an apparent privation of data and privacy concerns. China has at its disposal over 1 billion consumers on which to test its products, and as AI feeds on data, the more data at their disposal the greater their results will be (Business Daily, BBC Radio 4, 2019). 

The potential of facial recognition technology is staggering, and questions are being asked at whether it could be used for border controls instead of passport checks, thus reducing the need for checkpoints. However, there is one major obstacle that is preventing Chinese technology, such as facial recognition, from making inroads in the western market: trust. Major concerns over the censorship aspect of Chinese technology have come to light since April, for example, the discussion surrounding Huawei's involvement in the building of Britain's 5G network caught the attention of the global media; it was lauded a "trojan horse" (Sabbagh, D. 2019). China has a reputation for being a “control freak”, which is a problem for its global, commercial digital exports (Business Daily, BBC Radio 4, 2019). Most recently, a woman, blogging about the repression of Uighur Muslims in China was banned from the platform she used: Tik Tok, leading many to believe that the Chinese tech industry breaches the privacy of its users (Business Daily, BBC Radio 4, 2019). Growing anxiety about Chinese censorship has made any possibility of Chinese technology being used at the Irish border very unlikely, especially with the high potentiality for a data-sharing initiative at the border.

There is also the concern that following Brexit, that changes to the border between N. Ireland and the R. of Ireland could be extremely expensive and time-consuming. The technological solution is likely to be subjected to the trials and tribulations of parliament for months. It will also require large amounts of capital and investment to get the ball rolling and for its installation, although no estimate has been made to date. However, the potential cost of a hard border betweenthese nations (€430million) suggests that it will be expensive whatever the chosen outcome (Karlsson, L. et al. 2017).

Conclusion

As I have previously mentioned, a decision about the Irish border problem greatly depends on 'how' the UK leaves the European Union. A newly elected government led by Boris Johnson will leave no later than January 31st, 2020. The Brexit 'backstop' will likely come in to play as an "insurance policy", designed to avoid a hard border "under all circumstances" immediately after the UK's exit on January 31st (BBC Reality Check, 2019). However, Johnson will have until December of the same year to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, after which a clearer picture of the Irish border will start to appear. If the deal keeps the UK in the single market for goods and/or the customs union (unlikely), there will be little need for a hard border. However, if the UK leaves both of these institutions then it will be hard to avoid this and maintain a frictionless border. Technology seems to be the best current solution; a compromise between avoiding a hard border and achieving the best deal for the United Kingdom.

Bibliography

  • - Kirk, A. et al. (2019) The Telegraph. Revealed: Labour loses ground in 621 seats in YouGov election forecasting model Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/28/revealed-labour-loses-ground- in621-seats-yougov-election-forecasting/
  • - Karlsson, L. et al. (2017) Smart Border 2.0 – Avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland for customs control and the free movement of persons. Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs. For the AFCO Committee: European Parliament.
  • - N/a (2019) The Economist. Technology could make a hard border disappear, but at a cost. Available at:https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2019/02/14/technology-could-make-a-hard-border- disappear-but-at-a-cost
  • - Edgington, T. (2019) BBC Reality Check – Brexit Backstop: Can technology solve the Irish border problem?Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47047993
  • - Media Release, European Council, The President. (29. 4. 2017) European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations.
  • - UK Government, HM Treasury. (Oct 2017) Customs Bill: legislating for the UK's future customs, VAT and excise regimes
  • - Bloom, J. (2017) BBC News, Free trade area, single market, customs union - what's the difference? Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664
  • - Euroactiv.com, News article (17.8.2017) Available at: https://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-europe/news/is- the-norway-sweden-border- a-model-for-uk-ireland/
  • - Morris, C. (2018) BBC News article, Brexit: What can UK learn from other external EU borders? Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44054594
  • - Cellen-Jones, R. (2017) BBC News article, Frictionless borders: learning from Norway Available at:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41412561
  • - BBC Radio 4, Business Daily (2019) China moves from imitator to innovator Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3csy745
  • - Sabbagh, D. (2019) The Guardian, May to ban Huawei from providing 'core' parts of UK 5G network Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/24/may-to-ban-huawei-from-supplying-core- parts-of-uk-5g-network