{"title":"How might the GDPR evolve? A question of politics, pace and punishment","authors":"Gerard Buckley , Tristan Caulfield , Ingolf Becker","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The digital age has made personal data more valuable and less private. This paper explores the future of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by imagining a range of challenging scenarios and how it might handle them. We analyse United States’, Chinese and European approaches (self-regulation, state control, arms-length regulators) and identify four key drivers shaping the future regulatory landscape: econopolitics, enforcement capacity, societal trust, and speed of technological development. These scenarios lead us to envision six resultant versions of GDPR, ranging from laxer protection than now to models empowering individuals and regulators. While our analysis suggests a minor update to the status quo GDPR is the most likely outcome, we argue a more robust implementation is necessary. This would entail meaningful penalties for non-compliance, harmonised enforcement, a positive case to counter the regulation-stifles-innovation narrative, defence of cross-border data rights, and proactive guidelines to address emerging technologies. Strengthening the GDPR’s effectiveness is crucial to ensure the digital age empowers individuals, not just information technology corporations and governments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":"54 ","pages":"Article 106033"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364924000992/pdfft?md5=0e110841ca9f0647a9535293139f5c91&pid=1-s2.0-S0267364924000992-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364924000992","RegionNum":3,"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
The digital age has made personal data more valuable and less private. This paper explores the future of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by imagining a range of challenging scenarios and how it might handle them. We analyse United States’, Chinese and European approaches (self-regulation, state control, arms-length regulators) and identify four key drivers shaping the future regulatory landscape: econopolitics, enforcement capacity, societal trust, and speed of technological development. These scenarios lead us to envision six resultant versions of GDPR, ranging from laxer protection than now to models empowering individuals and regulators. While our analysis suggests a minor update to the status quo GDPR is the most likely outcome, we argue a more robust implementation is necessary. This would entail meaningful penalties for non-compliance, harmonised enforcement, a positive case to counter the regulation-stifles-innovation narrative, defence of cross-border data rights, and proactive guidelines to address emerging technologies. Strengthening the GDPR’s effectiveness is crucial to ensure the digital age empowers individuals, not just information technology corporations and governments.
期刊介绍:
CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.