Why data about people are so hard to govern

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Regulation & Governance Pub Date : 2024-04-02 DOI:10.1111/rego.12591
Wendy H. Wong, Jamie Duncan, David A. Lake
{"title":"Why data about people are so hard to govern","authors":"Wendy H. Wong, Jamie Duncan, David A. Lake","doi":"10.1111/rego.12591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How data on individuals are gathered, analyzed, and stored remains largely ungoverned at both domestic and global levels. We address the unique governance problem posed by digital data to provide a framework for understanding why data governance remains elusive. Data are easily transferable and replicable, making them a useful tool. But this characteristic creates massive governance problems for all of us who want to have some agency and choice over how (or if) our data are collected and used. Moreover, data are co‐created: individuals are the object from which data are culled by an interested party. Yet, any data point has a marginal value of close to zero and thus individuals have little bargaining power when it comes to negotiating with data collectors. Relatedly, data follow the rule of winner take all—the parties that have the most can leverage that data for greater accuracy and utility, leading to natural oligopolies. Finally, data's value lies in combination with proprietary algorithms that analyze and predict the patterns. Given these characteristics, private governance solutions are ineffective. Public solutions will also likely be insufficient. The imbalance in market power between platforms that collect data and individuals will be reproduced in the political sphere. We conclude that some form of collective data governance is required. We examine the challenges to the data governance by looking a public effort, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation, a private effort, Apple's “privacy nutrition labels” in their App Store, and a collective effort, the First Nations Information Governance Centre in Canada.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How data on individuals are gathered, analyzed, and stored remains largely ungoverned at both domestic and global levels. We address the unique governance problem posed by digital data to provide a framework for understanding why data governance remains elusive. Data are easily transferable and replicable, making them a useful tool. But this characteristic creates massive governance problems for all of us who want to have some agency and choice over how (or if) our data are collected and used. Moreover, data are co‐created: individuals are the object from which data are culled by an interested party. Yet, any data point has a marginal value of close to zero and thus individuals have little bargaining power when it comes to negotiating with data collectors. Relatedly, data follow the rule of winner take all—the parties that have the most can leverage that data for greater accuracy and utility, leading to natural oligopolies. Finally, data's value lies in combination with proprietary algorithms that analyze and predict the patterns. Given these characteristics, private governance solutions are ineffective. Public solutions will also likely be insufficient. The imbalance in market power between platforms that collect data and individuals will be reproduced in the political sphere. We conclude that some form of collective data governance is required. We examine the challenges to the data governance by looking a public effort, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation, a private effort, Apple's “privacy nutrition labels” in their App Store, and a collective effort, the First Nations Information Governance Centre in Canada.
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
为什么关于人的数据如此难以管理
在国内和全球范围内,如何收集、分析和存储个人数据在很大程度上仍然不受管理。我们探讨了数字数据带来的独特治理问题,为理解为什么数据治理仍然难以实现提供了一个框架。数据易于转移和复制,是一种有用的工具。但这一特点给我们所有人带来了巨大的治理问题,因为我们都希望对如何(或是否)收集和使用我们的数据拥有一定的代理权和选择权。此外,数据是共同创造的:个人是相关方从中获取数据的对象。然而,任何数据点的边际价值都接近于零,因此个人在与数据收集者谈判时几乎没有讨价还价的能力。与此相关的是,数据遵循赢家通吃的规则--拥有最多数据的一方可以利用这些数据获得更高的准确性和效用,从而形成天然的寡头垄断。最后,数据的价值在于与分析和预测模式的专有算法相结合。鉴于这些特点,私人治理解决方案是无效的。公共解决方案也很可能是不够的。收集数据的平台与个人之间市场力量的不平衡将在政治领域重现。我们的结论是,需要某种形式的集体数据治理。我们研究了数据治理所面临的挑战,包括公共努力--欧盟的《通用数据保护条例》、私人努力--苹果公司在其应用程序商店中的 "隐私营养标签",以及集体努力--加拿大的原住民信息治理中心。
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
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
期刊最新文献
Trusting organizational law Trust platforms: The digitalization of corporate governance and the transformation of trust in polycentric space From de jure to de facto transparency: Analyzing the compliance gap in light of freedom of information laws Mapping the relationship between regulation and innovation from an interdisciplinary perspective: A critical systematic review of the literature Problem exposure and problem solving: The impact of regulatory regimes on citizens' trust in regulated sectors
×
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