Privacy Localism

Rubinstein, Ira

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3124697

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Privacy research recognizes theoretical frameworks from economics (Acquisti 2014: Hoofnagle andWhittington, 2014) and information economics (Choi, Jeon, and Kim 2019), and includes the theories developed from within the field (Nissenbaum 2004;Rubinstein 2018;Solove 2006). Some recent advances examine the formation of institutions for governing privacy as part of a commons (Savage 2019), with reference to Elinor Ostrom's path-breaking institutional economic work (Ostrom 1990).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework For Evaluating City Governance Of Privacymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenge for Cities of Governing Spatial Data Privacy

Sun¹,

Whittington²

2023

Governing Smart Cities as Knowledge Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizations from both the public and private sector hold large quantities of data, in both static form and real-time flow. US governmental organizations increasingly depend on the timely use of data for evidence-based policy-making, thus allowing government data to be viewed as a public resource and the governance of data to influence public interpretations of the role of government in serving the public good. If these datasets were stored and shared more widely within and across organizations, the resulting analytics could be used to improve organizational efficiency and productivity, enable and empower the general public, and produce economic and commercial value. The governance of data is, however, subject to a tension between data sharing and the need to apply both legal and technical means to protect the privacy of individuals represented in the data, as well as the need to address questions about data as property for public and private agents (Whittington et al. 2015;Young et al. 2019). Local governments face technical and organizational barriers to governing data in the public interest, and have recently begun, as exhibited in the City of Seattle, to piece together policies, departmental resources, and implementation strategies for the purpose of effective governance of data.The lack of such governance structures not only prevents organizations from receiving the full benefits of their data, but also brings a number of costs to organizations and individuals represented in the data. Data sharing is often an essential first step to enable public-private partnerships, as would be needed to provide government oversight of firms operating within the city under permits or as vendors. Without an established set of protocols for sharing and governing data, considerable costs of repeated negotiation and legal disputes emerge for governments and firms (Savage 2019). Furthermore, the lack of established governance structures for data sharing opens up an unregulated and unmonitored market for data brokers, who may then collect and rejoin released datasets, re-identify data 29

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework For Evaluating City Governance Of Privacymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenge for Cities of Governing Spatial Data Privacy

Sun¹,

Whittington²

2023

Governing Smart Cities as Knowledge Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AFR has the potential to bring about enormous benefits, such as crime prevention and counterterrorism [3]. It deters terrorism through analysing past crimes to predict the chances that criminals will reoffend.…”

Section: Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 The law provides that collection and processing of biometric data including facial recognition is valid when "the data subject has given explicit consent to the processing of personal data". 3 The national and EU legislators have the discretion to decide the cases where the use of this technology guarantees a proportionate and necessary interference with human rights. 4 The GDPR shows the beginning of resistance to untrammelled data collection.…”

Section: Applying the Gdpr In The Deployment Of Afrmentioning

confidence: 99%

The global governance on automated facial recognition (AFR): ethical and legal opportunities and privacy challenges

2021

Int. Cybersecur. Law Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The digital revolution transforms people’s view about values and priorities. Automated facial recognition (AFR) comes with many concerns as well as benefits. The technology raises significant legal and ethical challenges, which risk perpetuating systemic injustice unless countervailing measures are put in place. The way facial images are obtained and used, potentially without consent or opportunities to opt out, can have a negative impact on people’s privacy. Laws on privacy vary across jurisdictions, which has an enormous effect on measures that could be taken to safeguard AFR-related ethical concerns. In an era of digitalisation, the existing laws are ill-equipped to address evolving needs against threats to individual privacy. Integrating the principles of proportionality and necessity, of the upmost importance is to ensure the proper use of AFR in a socially responsible way. It is imperative to build an AFR infrastructure that incorporates society’s legal and ethical commitments, and further address the challenges of governing the technology.

show abstract

“…hoc reports. 205 NYPD nonetheless has objected to even this weak form of oversight, and the bill has been stalled for nearly three years. 206 Against this background, the Brennan Center's effort to bring NYPD's predictive policing systems into the open took on more significance.…”

Section: Private Sector Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visible Policing: Technology, Transparency, and Democratic Control

Bloch-Wehba¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Law enforcement has an opacity problem. Police use sophisticated technologies to monitor individuals, surveil communities, and predict behaviors in increasingly intrusive ways. But legal institutions have struggled to understand—let alone set limits on—new investigative methods and techniques, for two major reasons. New technologies of surveillance, often procured from or otherwise reliant on the private sector, tend to operate in opaque and unaccountable ways, augmenting police power while remaining free of meaningful oversight. At the same time, shifts in Fourth Amendment doctrine have expanded law enforcement’s ability to engage in surveillance free of oversight or scrutiny by courts or by the public. The result is that modern policing is not highly visible to oversight institutions, and is becoming even less so.In light of these informational dynamics, transparency litigation has become a core technique for rendering obscure investigative practices visible and holding police accountable. These new lawsuits form a criminal procedure “shadow docket”—they resolve important questions about democratic governance of policing without deciding on the constitutionality of searches and seizures. This Article builds on the government secrecy literature to explore the significance of this “shadow docket” and the relationship between transparency obligations and constitutional limits on police action. In the absence of meaningful Fourth Amendment safeguards, the Article shows, transparency makes policing practices increasingly visible to the public and to democratic institutions in areas in which constitutional criminal procedure today has minimal reach. These efforts to make policing visible bear important lessons for advocates and scholars of criminal procedure, criminal justice reform, and transparency itself.

show abstract

Privacy Localism

Cited by 7 publications

References 24 publications

The Challenge for Cities of Governing Spatial Data Privacy

The Challenge for Cities of Governing Spatial Data Privacy

The global governance on automated facial recognition (AFR): ethical and legal opportunities and privacy challenges

Visible Policing: Technology, Transparency, and Democratic Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About