Sovereignty in the Digital and Contact Tracing Apps.

Max Tretter
{"title":"Sovereignty in the Digital and Contact Tracing Apps.","authors":"Max Tretter","doi":"10.1007/s44206-022-00030-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recently, the concept of sovereignty in the digital has attracted much attention. Several publications dealing with this concept assume that it can best be described as a network of different, overlapping exercises of power. Nevertheless, there is a need for further research on how exactly sovereignty in the digital can be understood. In order to contribute to a better understanding of this concept, I illustrate its complex structure using contact tracing apps as a paradigmatic example. I conduct a narrative review to show what sovereignty looks like in the context of these apps. In the context of digital contact tracing apps, sovereignty is best understood as a complex network of three actors-nations, (big tech) companies, and individuals-that exercise various forms of power against or on behalf of each other to claim sovereignty for themselves and to either weaken or strengthen the sovereignty claims of other actors. Since large parts of the results can be generalized from the particular context of contact tracing apps, they contribute to a better overall understanding of the concept of sovereignty in digital. This might, in turn, be helpful for discussions about this technology as well as about the regulation and governance of the digital in general.</p>","PeriodicalId":72819,"journal":{"name":"Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology","volume":"2 1","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9791621/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-022-00030-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recently, the concept of sovereignty in the digital has attracted much attention. Several publications dealing with this concept assume that it can best be described as a network of different, overlapping exercises of power. Nevertheless, there is a need for further research on how exactly sovereignty in the digital can be understood. In order to contribute to a better understanding of this concept, I illustrate its complex structure using contact tracing apps as a paradigmatic example. I conduct a narrative review to show what sovereignty looks like in the context of these apps. In the context of digital contact tracing apps, sovereignty is best understood as a complex network of three actors-nations, (big tech) companies, and individuals-that exercise various forms of power against or on behalf of each other to claim sovereignty for themselves and to either weaken or strengthen the sovereignty claims of other actors. Since large parts of the results can be generalized from the particular context of contact tracing apps, they contribute to a better overall understanding of the concept of sovereignty in digital. This might, in turn, be helpful for discussions about this technology as well as about the regulation and governance of the digital in general.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字和联系人追踪应用程序中的主权。
最近,数字主权的概念引起了广泛关注。一些涉及这一概念的出版物认为,最好将其描述为不同的、相互重叠的权力行使网络。尽管如此,仍有必要进一步研究如何理解数字主权。为了有助于更好地理解这一概念,我以联系人追踪应用程序为例,说明其复杂的结构。我通过叙事回顾来说明主权在这些应用程序中的表现形式。在数字联系人追踪应用程序的背景下,主权最好被理解为由国家、(大型科技)公司和个人这三个行为体组成的复杂网络,他们相互之间或代表对方行使各种形式的权力,为自己主张主权,并削弱或加强其他行为体的主权主张。由于大部分研究结果可以从联系人追踪应用程序的特定背景中概括出来,因此有助于更好地全面理解数字主权的概念。反过来,这可能有助于有关该技术以及一般数字技术的监管和治理的讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Concept of Balance of Interest in the Context of Active Assisted Living Auditing of AI: Legal, Ethical and Technical Approaches Automated Content Writing Tools and the Question of Objectivity Norms for Academic Writing in the Era of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Making AI’s Impact on Pathology Visible: Using Ethnographic Methods for Ethical and Epistemological Insights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1