Community Data Collection Registry · Cohort 2 · 2025

Which data tools respect farmer sovereignty?

An independent Ethical Technology Assessment of six data collection platforms — evaluated for agricultural research, field monitoring, and community-controlled data infrastructure use.

6Tools Assessed
18ETA Questions
4Entry Gates
Tier 2Confidence
ETA Framework v1.0 · Dataset Mode G1 Transparency 10pts G2 Rights & Control 10pts G3 No Abuse 10pts G4 Stewardship 10pts Data Ethics 15pts Interoperability 15pts Commons Fit 15pts Accessibility 15pts
01 — Individual Assessments
Full ETA Scorecards
Each card links to a fully editable dynamic scorecard where you can submit your own assessment as an independent reviewer. Scores are peer-reviewed (Tier 2 confidence).
02 — Side-by-Side Comparison
All Tools · All Dimensions
Direct category-by-category comparison. Higher scores indicate stronger ethical alignment for community-controlled agricultural data collection.
Recommended · Community Data Infrastructure Stack
SurveyStack + ODK + KoboToolbox — The Open Data Stack
SurveyStack for agricultural survey design and farmOS integration (90), ODK for open-standard field collection with full self-hosting (87), and KoboToolbox for humanitarian-grade nonprofit infrastructure with offline resilience (84). Together these form a fully ETA-eligible, farmer-controlled, commons-aligned data collection stack.
90SurveyStack
87ODK
84KoboToolbox
Assessment Methodology & Confidence

Framework: ETA v1.0 Dataset Assessment at Tier 2 (Peer-Reviewed) confidence (×1.00). Scores reflect publicly available documentation, privacy policies, source code, and independent audits as of Q1 2025. This cohort applies ETA in data-collection-tool mode, weighting farmer data sovereignty, offline capability, and interoperability with agricultural data standards (XForms, farmOS, FAIR).

Gate structure: All four entry gates (G1–G4) are binary pass/fail, 10 points each. Any gate failure prevents ETA Eligible status regardless of category scores. Google Forms receives a conditional G2 pass because Google Workspace data terms do allow organizational data export — however, consumer use is far more ambiguous. The gate assessment reflects the best-case documented use.

Key differentiators for this cohort: Offline capability is critical for agricultural field use — tools that cannot function offline score lower on Accessibility. Self-hosting determines whether communities truly control their data infrastructure or depend on a third-party cloud. Agricultural interoperability (XForms/XLSForm standard, farmOS integration, FAIR principles) determines fitness for the OpenTEAM ecosystem specifically.

Critical stance: Airtable's broad content license grant and SurveyCTO's proprietary server lock-in are treated as significant flags. Google's vast surveillance infrastructure means Google Forms data sits within an advertising-driven ecosystem, regardless of per-product assurances. These concerns are reflected in scores even when legal terms technically allow data export.

Contribute: Use the "Add Your Review" button on any scorecard to submit an independent assessment. Future versions will connect to a database backend for persistent registry storage and community confidence updates.