Introduction: conceptual framework and research design for a comparative analysis of national eID Management Systems in selected European countries

Abstract

This paper introduces the objectives and basic approach of a collaborative comparative research project on

Public-Private Collaboration in the Emergence of a National Electronic Identification Policy: The Case of NemID in Denmark

“…E-IDs have been studied from many perspectives, including technological decision [45], trust and public value [40], surveillance [23], security [46], historical evolution [14], legal framework [22], innovation process [19,20], market governance [10], and life cycle [26]. In this body of research a variety of theories -such as innovation [19,20] and boundary object [13] theories -and methods -such as case studies [13,14], and surveys [40] -have been applied.…”

The Limits of Control – (Governmental) Identity Management from a Privacy Perspective

“…The danger of function creep intensifies in the angle of recent political measures towards extended monitoring of online activity for preventing crime: e.g., European Data Retention Directive 5 , internet content-filtering plans 6 (i.e., against child abuse and copyright offense), or the INDECT project aiming to merge several surveillance technologies (e.g., CCTV, data mining, automatic threat detection) into one intelligent information system 7 .…”

“…Identification is a core function of governments and thus the creation of national e-ID systems implies far reaching transformations with many different aspects involved (e.g., technological, organizational, legal, political) [6], which contribute "to alter the nature of citizenship itself" [7]. Thus, e-ID is more than a device for citizen identification; it becomes a policy instrument.…”

“…The sometimes tense relations between privacy and security 1 are also visible in the e-ID discourse (cf. [6], [7]). The capability of an e-IDMS to enhance privacy naturally depends on the concrete system implementation and its surrounding framework it is embedded in.…”

Introducing public sector eIDs: The power of actors’ translations and institutional barriers

“…In addition, in the information society, the protection of personalized data is of great concern and tightly linked to basic human rights, personal privacy, integrity concerns as well as different aspects of security. Moreover, the registration process, when the physical identity of the individual requiring the eID, is often described as a very crucial security parameter (Kubicek, 2010;Kubicek & Noack, 2010b). So, in order for a user's identity to be authenticated for access to a particular (physical or digital) service context, the user (1) presents an identification, the artefact, which shape or form varies depending on the context, physical or digital.…”