用人工智能非接触路径上的数据治理大流行病:追踪新冠肺炎的韩国、欧洲和美国的个人数据、公共卫生和数字鸿沟

IF 0.9 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Partecipazione e Conflitto Pub Date : 2021-06-24 DOI:10.1285/i20356609v14i1p79
June Park
{"title":"用人工智能非接触路径上的数据治理大流行病:追踪新冠肺炎的韩国、欧洲和美国的个人数据、公共卫生和数字鸿沟","authors":"June Park","doi":"10.1285/i20356609v14i1p79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Is conditional and temporary collection of data necessary in a public health crisis for democracies? This article attempts at examining the institutional variance in digital tool deployment to contact trace COVID-19 across six different democratic systems: South Korea, Europe (Germany, France, Italy and the UK post-Brexit) and the U.S. It aims at projecting varied country strategies in embracing the digital economy of the future driven by artificial intelligence (AI) as the contactless economy becomes the norm. Europe and the U.S. have refrained from a centralized contact tracing method that involve GPS data collection and used a minimalist approach utilizing apps based on Google and Apple's Application Programming Interface (API) enabled by Bluetooth technology downloadable only voluntary by citizens, with western European countries striving to abide by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), in turn failing to flatten the curve earlier on during the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, South Korea's maximalist approach of digital tracing utilizing big data analysis on the centralized COVID-19 Smart Management System (SMS) platform and apps on self-diagnosis and self-quarantine under the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act (IDCPA) – revised in the aftermath of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2015 – led the country to flatten the curve at an early stage. In addressing the gaps among varied approaches, this article analyzes the legal foundations and policy rationale for conditional and temporary data collection and processing across jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":45168,"journal":{"name":"Partecipazione e Conflitto","volume":"14 1","pages":"79-112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Governing a Pandemic with Data on the Contactless Path to AI: Personal Data, Public Health, and the Digital Divide in South Korea, Europe and the United States in Tracking of COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"June Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1285/i20356609v14i1p79\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Is conditional and temporary collection of data necessary in a public health crisis for democracies? This article attempts at examining the institutional variance in digital tool deployment to contact trace COVID-19 across six different democratic systems: South Korea, Europe (Germany, France, Italy and the UK post-Brexit) and the U.S. It aims at projecting varied country strategies in embracing the digital economy of the future driven by artificial intelligence (AI) as the contactless economy becomes the norm. Europe and the U.S. have refrained from a centralized contact tracing method that involve GPS data collection and used a minimalist approach utilizing apps based on Google and Apple's Application Programming Interface (API) enabled by Bluetooth technology downloadable only voluntary by citizens, with western European countries striving to abide by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), in turn failing to flatten the curve earlier on during the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, South Korea's maximalist approach of digital tracing utilizing big data analysis on the centralized COVID-19 Smart Management System (SMS) platform and apps on self-diagnosis and self-quarantine under the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act (IDCPA) – revised in the aftermath of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2015 – led the country to flatten the curve at an early stage. In addressing the gaps among varied approaches, this article analyzes the legal foundations and policy rationale for conditional and temporary data collection and processing across jurisdictions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Partecipazione e Conflitto\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"79-112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Partecipazione e Conflitto\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v14i1p79\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Partecipazione e Conflitto","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v14i1p79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在民主国家的公共卫生危机中,有条件和临时收集数据是否必要?本文试图研究六个不同民主制度中接触者追踪新冠肺炎数字工具部署的制度差异:韩国,欧洲(英国脱欧后的德国、法国、意大利和英国)和美国。随着非接触式经济成为常态,它旨在规划各种国家战略,以拥抱人工智能驱动的未来数字经济。欧洲和美国避免了涉及GPS数据收集的集中联系人追踪方法,并使用了基于谷歌和苹果应用程序编程接口(API)的应用程序的最低限度方法,该应用程序由蓝牙技术支持,只能由公民自愿下载,西欧国家努力遵守《通用数据保护条例》(GDPR),而在新冠肺炎大流行期间未能早些时候使曲线变平。同时韩国根据2015年中东呼吸综合征(MERS)后修订的《传染病控制和预防法》(IDCPA),利用中央新冠肺炎智能管理系统(SMS)平台上的大数据分析和自我诊断和自我隔离应用程序进行数字追踪的最大化方法,导致该国在早期拉平了曲线阶段为了解决各种方法之间的差距,本文分析了跨司法管辖区有条件和临时数据收集和处理的法律基础和政策依据。
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
Governing a Pandemic with Data on the Contactless Path to AI: Personal Data, Public Health, and the Digital Divide in South Korea, Europe and the United States in Tracking of COVID-19
Is conditional and temporary collection of data necessary in a public health crisis for democracies? This article attempts at examining the institutional variance in digital tool deployment to contact trace COVID-19 across six different democratic systems: South Korea, Europe (Germany, France, Italy and the UK post-Brexit) and the U.S. It aims at projecting varied country strategies in embracing the digital economy of the future driven by artificial intelligence (AI) as the contactless economy becomes the norm. Europe and the U.S. have refrained from a centralized contact tracing method that involve GPS data collection and used a minimalist approach utilizing apps based on Google and Apple's Application Programming Interface (API) enabled by Bluetooth technology downloadable only voluntary by citizens, with western European countries striving to abide by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), in turn failing to flatten the curve earlier on during the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, South Korea's maximalist approach of digital tracing utilizing big data analysis on the centralized COVID-19 Smart Management System (SMS) platform and apps on self-diagnosis and self-quarantine under the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act (IDCPA) – revised in the aftermath of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2015 – led the country to flatten the curve at an early stage. In addressing the gaps among varied approaches, this article analyzes the legal foundations and policy rationale for conditional and temporary data collection and processing across jurisdictions.
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
Partecipazione e Conflitto
Partecipazione e Conflitto POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: PArtecipazione e COnflitto [PArticipation and COnflict] is an International Journal based in Italy specialized in social and political studies. PACO houses research and studies on the transformations of politics and its key players (political parties, interest groups, social movements, associations, unions, etc.), focusing in particular on the dynamics of participation both by individuals acting in conventional ways, and by those who prefer protest-oriented repertoires of action. Special attention is also paid to the dynamics of transformation of contemporary political systems, with an eye fixed on the processes of democratization besides on the spaces opening to the new forms of governance both at local and sub-national, and supra-national level. All are inscribed in that complex phenomenon represented by the trans-nationalization of social, political and economic processes, without neglecting the nation-state dimension. The journal emphasizes innovative studies and research of high methodological rigor, treasuring of the most recent theoretical and empirical contributions in social and political sciences.
期刊最新文献
Community-Led Housing in Yangon: The Struggles of Non-Confrontational Resistance and Feminist Crisis Management The Xi'an Schizophrenia Imaging Lab (SIL) data and ten years of MRI study on schizophrenia. Overcoming the limits of EMU through Covid? Next Generation EU against the unaddressed needs for ambitious structural reform The Political Economy of a Collusive Urban Regime: Making Sense of Urban Development Projects in Rome (Re)Creating "Society in Silico": Surveillance Capitalism, Simulations and Subjectivity in the Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal
×
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