Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 The Way Forward -- 1.3 Potential for Future Research -- Chapter 2: A Prototype Data Governance Framework for Africa -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Background and Literature Review -- 2.3 An Organizational Framework for Data Governance -- 2.4 A Prototype Data Governance Framework for Africa -- 2.4.1 Principles -- 2.4.2 Infrastructure -- 2.5 Conclusion and Recommendations -- References -- Chapter 3: A Value Chain Approach to Data Production, Use, and Governance for Sound Policymaking in Africa -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Methodology -- 3.3 Production and Dissemination of Official Statistics in Africa -- 3.4 Value Chain Theory in Data Production, Use, and Governance -- 3.5 Value Chain Approach to Production and Dissemination of Official Statistics in Africa -- 3.5.1 Identification of Data Needs for Different Users -- 3.5.2 Designing Data Production Processes -- 3.5.3 Development and Testing of Data Collection Instruments and Other Key Processes -- 3.5.4 Data Collection, Processing, and Analysis -- 3.5.5 Dissemination and Use of Official Statistics -- 3.5.6 Data Governance -- 3.6 Case Studies -- 3.6.1 Case Study One: Australian Bureau of Statistics -- 3.6.2 Case Study Two: National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda -- 3.6.3 Case Study Three: Statistics South Africa -- 3.6.4 Discussion on the Case Studies -- 3.7 Recommendations -- 3.7.1 Strengthening the Systems Used in Collection and Processing of Administrative Data -- 3.7.2 Use of Non-traditional Sources of Data in Production of Official Statistics -- 3.7.3 Identification of Needs for Different Users and Establishing a National Users' Engagement Platform.

Im britischen "Office for National Statistics" (ONS) wurden in den vergangenen zwei Jahren verschiedene Methoden zur Verbesserung der Erhebungsinstrumente bei Unternehmensbefragungen entwickelt und erprobt. Der vorliegende Beitrag berichtet über die Merkmale der Instrumente zur Datengewinnung bei Unternehmensumfragen im ONS, über Weiterentwicklungen und Verbesserungen sowie über die Rahmenbedingungen einer Bewertung der eingesetzten Erhebungsinstrumente. (ICI)

Abstract
Data has become a critical trans-national and cross-border resource. Yet, the lack of a well-defined approach to using it poses challenges to harnessing its value. This article explores the increasing importance of global data governance due to the rapid growth of data, and the need for responsible data practices. The purpose of this paper is to compare approaches and identify patterns in the emergent data governance ecosystem within sectors close to the international development field, ultimately presenting key takeaways and reflections on when and why a global data governance framework may be needed. Overall, the paper provides information about the conditions when a more holistic, coordinated transnational approach to data governance may be needed to responsibly manage the global flow of data. The report does this by (a) considering conditions specified by the literature that may be conducive to global data governance, and (b) analyzing and comparing existing frameworks, specifically investigating six key elements: purpose, principles, anchoring documents, data description and lifecycle, processes, and practices. The article closes with a series of final recommendations, which include adopting a broader concept of data stewardship to reconcile data protection and promotion, focusing on responsible reuse of data to unlock socioeconomic value, harmonizing meanings to operationalize principles, incorporating global human rights frameworks to provide common North Stars, unifying key definitions of data, adopting a data lifecycle approach, incorporating participatory processes and collective agency, investing in new professions with specific roles, improving accountability through oversight and compliance mechanisms, and translating recommendations into practical tools.

The first few years of the 21st century were characterised by a progressive loss of privacy. Two phenomena converged to give rise to the data economy: the realisation that data trails from users interacting with technology could be used to develop personalised advertising, and a concern for security that led authorities to use such personal data for the purposes of intelligence and policing. In contrast to the early days of the data economy and internet surveillance, the last few years have witnessed a rising concern for privacy. As bad data practices have come to light, citizens are starting to understand the real cost of using online digital technologies. Two events stamped 2018 as a landmark year for privacy: the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and the implementation of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The former showed the extent to which personal data has been shared without data subjects' knowledge and consent and many times for unacceptable purposes, such as swaying elections. The latter inaugurated the beginning of robust data protection regulation in the digital age. Getting privacy right is one of the biggest challenges of this new decade of the 21st century. The past year has shown that there is still much work to be done on privacy to tame the darkest aspects of the data economy. As data scandals continue to emerge, questions abound as to how to interpret and enforce regulation, how to design new and better laws, how to complement regulation with better ethics, and how to find technical solutions to data problems. The aim of the research project Data, Privacy, and the Individual is to contribute to a better understanding of the ethics of privacy and of differential privacy. The outcomes of the project are seven research papers on privacy, a survey, and this final report, which summarises each research paper, and goes on to offer a set of reflections and recommendations to implement best practices regarding privacy.

Mit dem in diesem Jahr vorgeschlagenen Data Act versucht die EU-Kommission die europäische Datenwirtschaft wettbewerbsfähig zu machen. Das Ziel des ambitionierten Vorschlags stößt auf breiten Konsens. Jedoch gibt es an der konkreten Ausgestaltung erhebliche Kritik, die Nachbesserung im weiteren Gesetzgebungsverfahren notwendig erscheinen lässt.

AbstractAutomated systems collect vast amounts of data, which could be utilized across various business sectors. The EU has recognized their potential for the data economy. To exploit such potential, there is a need to provide access to data. For example, the objective of the EU's Data Act is to provide new possibilities for accessing and reusing information. Some information exchanged may be subject to trade secret protection. However, specific characteristics of trade secret protection create difficulties for information sharing. In essence, trade secret protection requires that information should be kept secret, or at least relatively secret. This requirement contributes to the reluctance of trade secret holders to share their information. They would rather lock it down. That is because, if the information becomes generally known in industry circles, it will lose its trade secret status along with any related competitive advantage. At the same time, trade secret protection leaves considerable room for competition, which arguably makes it suited to the data economy. A trade secret is not an exclusive right, which means that competitors may independently create similar information. Access to information through reverse engineering is also allowed. All these specific characteristics make trade secret protection an uncertain means of protection. This article will elaborate on how the uncertainties and specifics related to trade secret protection create a conflict between demand for access to information and the protection of trade secrets. It will analyze how the provisions of the Data Act aim to accommodate the protection of trade secrets while simultaneously mandating access.

The digital domain, technological innovations, and Big Data analytics increasingly shape the lives of millions of individuals, groups, organisation, and societies. This cyber age calls for effective governance to protect the basic interests and needs of individuals and groups. Simultaneously, the very nature of governance is changing. Increasingly policy-making moves away from top-down governance by the state towards more horizontal modes of governance. This paper argues that network in the term network governance needs to be taken seriously in order to reconceptualize power and responsibily in networked societies. Therefore, we combine the literature on governance with social network theory to conceptualise governance in the Cyber Age. It will be argued that dominant modes of governance are inadequate to govern the Cyber domain. Therefore, a novel networked mode of governance is proposed based on the regulation of new power relationships between Cyber actors and civil society.

Today, cross-border data flows are an important component of international trade and an element of digital service models. However, they are impeded by restrictions on cross-border personal data transfers and data localization legislation. This Article focuses primarily on these complexities and on the impact of the new European Union ("EU") legislation on personal data protection—the GDPR. First, this Article introduces its discussion of these flows by placing them in their economic and geopolitical setting, including a discussion of the results of a lack of international harmonization of law in the area. In this framework, rule overlap and rival standards are relevant. Once this situation is established, this Article turns to an analysis of the legal measures that have filled the gap left by the lack of international regulation and the failure to harmonize law: extraterritorial laws in the European Union (regional legislation) and the United States (state legislation); and data localization laws in China and Russia. Specific provisions restricting cross-border personal data transfers are detailed under EU legislation, as are the international agreements that have been invaluable in allowing flows between the United States and the European Union to continue—first the Safe Harbor, and now the Privacy Shield. Finally, in this context, the role of data governance is investigated, both in the context of data controllers' accountability for the actions of other actors in global supply chains under EU law and under the Privacy Shield. Thus, this Article goes beyond the law itself, to place requirements in the context of the globalized business world of data flows, and to suggest ways that companies may improve their compliance position worldwide.

Abstract
With the drafts of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Data Governance Act (DGA), the EU Commission presented three cornerstones of its digital regulation approach in November and December of 2020. This article looks at data transactions and focuses on four aspects which illustrate that the proposed Acts leave ample room for improvement in terms of the coherence and specificity of their respective rules: the specificity of data-related provisions; the role of FRAND in the Package context; the role of data intermediaries; and the upcoming Data Act. Beyond diagnosis, the article calls for an integrative approach and proposes improvements. It aims to spark a more intense discourse on data transactions under the Package.