引领数字监管:越多越好,还是政策泡沫?

Cristiano Codagnone, Linda Weigl
{"title":"引领数字监管:越多越好,还是政策泡沫?","authors":"Cristiano Codagnone,&nbsp;Linda Weigl","doi":"10.1007/s44206-023-00033-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For about a decade, the concept of 'digital sovereignty' has been prominent in the European policy discourse. In the quest for digital sovereignty, the European Union has adopted a constitutional approach to protect fundamental rights and democratic values, and to ensure fair and competitive digital markets. Thus, 'digital constitutionalism' emerged as a twin discourse. A corollary of these discourses is a third phenomenon resulting from a regulatory externalisation of European law beyond the bloc's borders, the so-called 'Brussels Effect'. The dynamics arising from Europe's digital policy and regulatory activism imply increasing legal complexities. This paper argues that this phenomenon in policy-making is a case of a positive 'policy bubble' characterised by an oversupply of policies and legislative acts. The phenomenon can be explained by the amplification of values in the framing of digital policy issues. To unpack the policy frames and values at stake, this paper provides an overview of the digital policy landscape, followed by a critical assessment to showcase the practical implications of positive policy bubbles.</p>","PeriodicalId":72819,"journal":{"name":"Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology","volume":"2 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9844176/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leading the Charge on Digital Regulation: The More, the Better, or Policy Bubble?\",\"authors\":\"Cristiano Codagnone,&nbsp;Linda Weigl\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44206-023-00033-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For about a decade, the concept of 'digital sovereignty' has been prominent in the European policy discourse. In the quest for digital sovereignty, the European Union has adopted a constitutional approach to protect fundamental rights and democratic values, and to ensure fair and competitive digital markets. Thus, 'digital constitutionalism' emerged as a twin discourse. A corollary of these discourses is a third phenomenon resulting from a regulatory externalisation of European law beyond the bloc's borders, the so-called 'Brussels Effect'. The dynamics arising from Europe's digital policy and regulatory activism imply increasing legal complexities. This paper argues that this phenomenon in policy-making is a case of a positive 'policy bubble' characterised by an oversupply of policies and legislative acts. The phenomenon can be explained by the amplification of values in the framing of digital policy issues. To unpack the policy frames and values at stake, this paper provides an overview of the digital policy landscape, followed by a critical assessment to showcase the practical implications of positive policy bubbles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9844176/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"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/s44206-023-00033-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital society : ethics, socio-legal and governance of digital technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00033-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

大约十年来,“数字主权”的概念在欧洲政策话语中一直很突出。在寻求数字主权的过程中,欧盟采取了宪法方法来保护基本权利和民主价值观,并确保公平和竞争的数字市场。因此,“数字宪政”作为一种双重话语出现了。这些论述的必然结果是第三种现象,即所谓的“布鲁塞尔效应”,这种现象是由欧盟以外的欧洲法律监管外部化造成的。欧洲数字政策和监管激进主义带来的动态变化意味着法律复杂性的增加。本文认为,政策制定中的这种现象是一种积极的“政策泡沫”,其特征是政策和立法行为供过于求。这种现象可以通过数字政策问题框架中的价值放大来解释。为了揭示利害攸关的政策框架和价值观,本文概述了数字政策格局,然后进行了批判性评估,以展示积极政策泡沫的实际影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Leading the Charge on Digital Regulation: The More, the Better, or Policy Bubble?

For about a decade, the concept of 'digital sovereignty' has been prominent in the European policy discourse. In the quest for digital sovereignty, the European Union has adopted a constitutional approach to protect fundamental rights and democratic values, and to ensure fair and competitive digital markets. Thus, 'digital constitutionalism' emerged as a twin discourse. A corollary of these discourses is a third phenomenon resulting from a regulatory externalisation of European law beyond the bloc's borders, the so-called 'Brussels Effect'. The dynamics arising from Europe's digital policy and regulatory activism imply increasing legal complexities. This paper argues that this phenomenon in policy-making is a case of a positive 'policy bubble' characterised by an oversupply of policies and legislative acts. The phenomenon can be explained by the amplification of values in the framing of digital policy issues. To unpack the policy frames and values at stake, this paper provides an overview of the digital policy landscape, followed by a critical assessment to showcase the practical implications of positive policy bubbles.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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