Automated Facial Recognition Technology: Recent Developments and Approaches to Oversight

Mann, Monique; Smith, Marcus

doi:10.53637/kavv4291

Cited by 34 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Even where FRT is overtly deployed, it raises concerns in comparison with other biometric technologies because the technology can connect a person's face to his or her identity in public settings, where people have few options to avoid surveillance (de Andrade et al, 2013). The level of intrusiveness is dependent on a range of factors related to how the technology is (mis)used (Mann and Smith, 2017). For example, there is often less concern about privacy when FRT is used for a limited purpose such as confirming a person's identity (e.g.…”

Section: Violations Of Privacy and Data (Mis)usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other countries such as Australia, Germany, and the United Kingdom (UK), are scrutinizing FRT more closely to determine what sorts of oversight mechanisms (e.g. audits) might be required (Mann and Smith, 2017). Further, the European Parliament is moving toward banning FRT use in public spaces (European Parliament, 2021).…”

Section: Lack Of Oversight and Limited Transparencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The algorithmic technology associated with biometrics has become so complex that it is often beyond the understanding of social scientists, lay people, and potentially the engineers themselves who often fail to apply a critical lens to their work (Marciano, 2019). However, FRT in the most basic sense numerically quantifies facial features into measurements that can be compared with a searchable database of such measurements to suggest or verify an identity (Galterio et al, 2018; Gates, 2006; Mann and Smith, 2017). Although using photographs and biometrics (e.g.…”

Section: Controversies Surrounding Police Use Of Frtmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Police use of facial recognition technology: The potential for engaging the public through co-constructed policy-making

Hill

O’Connor

Slane

2022

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the face of rapid technological development of investigative technologies, broader and more meaningful public engagement in policy-making is paramount. In this article, we identify police procurement and use of facial recognition technology (FRT) as a key example of the need for public input to avoid undermining trust in law enforcement. Specifically, public engagement should be incorporated into police decisions regarding the acquisition, use, and assessment of the effectiveness of FRT, via an oversight framework that incorporates citizen stakeholders. Genuine public engagement requires sufficient and accurate information to be openly available at the outset, and the public must be able to dialogue and discuss their perspectives and ideas with others. The approach outlined in this article could serve as a model for addressing policy development barriers that often arise in relation to privacy invasive technologies and their uses by police.

show abstract

Section: Violations Of Privacy and Data (Mis)usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lack Of Oversight and Limited Transparencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Controversies Surrounding Police Use Of Frtmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Police use of facial recognition technology: The potential for engaging the public through co-constructed policy-making

Hill

O’Connor

Slane

2022

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In law enforcement, FRT can be used for preventive aims, such as to prevent a previously identified perpetrator from committing another crime (‘pre-emptively to identify and manage’, Mann & Smith, 2017 , p. 124), or for repressive aims, such as to identify a person who is wanted for a crime.…”

Section: Legal Definition Of the Scenarios In Which Frt Can Be Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Facial Recognition Technology by Law Enforcement in Europe: a Non-Orwellian Draft Proposal

Raposo

2022

Eur J Crim Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European legal framework is not devoid of norms that are directly or indirectly applicable to facial recognition technology for identification purposes within law enforcement. However, these various norms, which have different targets and are from multiple sources, create a kind of legal patchwork that could undermine the lawful use of this technology in criminal investigations. This paper advocates the creation of a specific law on the use of facial recognition technology for identification in law enforcement, based on existing regulations, to specifically address the pressing issues arising in this domain. The ultimate aim is to allow its use under certain conditions and to protect the rights of the people involved, but also to provide law enforcement authorities with the necessary tools to combat serious crimes.

show abstract

“…In particular in this context, researchers have voiced concerns of FRT's discriminatory effects (Braca, 2017;Ngan et al, 2015), racial bias in accuracy (Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018), flawed data (Garvie, 2019), and privacy violations (Milligan, 1999;Schwartz, 2012). This debate has spurred calls for greater accountability and oversight of FRT (Mann & Smith, 2017;Naker & Greenbaum, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facial Recognition: A cross-national Survey on Public Acceptance, Privacy, and Discrimination

Steinacker¹,

Meckel²,

Kostka³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With rapid advances in machine learning (ML), more of this technology is being deployed into the real world interacting with us and our environment. One of the most widely applied application of ML is facial recognition as it is running on millions of devices. While being useful for some people, others perceive it as a threat when used by public authorities. This discrepancy and the lack of policy increases the uncertainty in the ML community about the future direction of facial recognition research and development. In this paper we present results from a cross-national survey about public acceptance, privacy, and discrimination of the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) in the public. This study provides insights about the opinion towards FRT from China, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), which can serve as input for policy makers and legal regulators.

show abstract

Automated Facial Recognition Technology: Recent Developments and Approaches to Oversight

Cited by 34 publications

References 0 publications

Police use of facial recognition technology: The potential for engaging the public through co-constructed policy-making

Police use of facial recognition technology: The potential for engaging the public through co-constructed policy-making

The Use of Facial Recognition Technology by Law Enforcement in Europe: a Non-Orwellian Draft Proposal

Facial Recognition: A cross-national Survey on Public Acceptance, Privacy, and Discrimination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About