IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v48y2024i10s0308596124001484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Privacy and personal data risk governance for generative artificial intelligence: A Chinese perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ye, Xiongbiao
  • Yan, Yuhong
  • Li, Jia
  • Jiang, Bo

Abstract

The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has attracted global attention and posed challenges to existing data governance frameworks. The increased technical complexity and expanded scale of data usage not only make it more difficult to regulate AI but also present challenges for the current legal system. This article, which takes ChatGPT's training data and working principles as a starting point, examines specific privacy risks, data leakage risks, and personal data risks posed by generative AI. It also analyzes the latest practices in privacy and personal data protection in China. This article finds that while China's governance on privacy and personal data protection takes a macro-micro integration approach and a private-and-public law integration approach, there are shortcomings in the legal system. Given that the current personal data protection system centered on individual control is unsuitable for the modes of data processing by generative AI, and that private law is insufficient in safeguarding data privacy, urgent institutional innovation is needed to achieve the objective of “trustworthy AI.”

Suggested Citation

  • Ye, Xiongbiao & Yan, Yuhong & Li, Jia & Jiang, Bo, 2024. "Privacy and personal data risk governance for generative artificial intelligence: A Chinese perspective," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:10:s0308596124001484
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124001484
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102851?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edwards, Lilian & Veale, Michael, 2017. "Slave to the Algorithm? Why a 'right to an explanation' is probably not the remedy you are looking for," LawArXiv 97upg, Center for Open Science.
    2. I. Ooijen & Helena U. Vrabec, 2019. "Does the GDPR Enhance Consumers’ Control over Personal Data? An Analysis from a Behavioural Perspective," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 91-107, March.
    3. Lynskey, Orla, 2014. "Deconstructing data protection: the 'Added-value' of a right to data protection in the EU legal order," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 57713, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. König, Pascal D. & Wenzelburger, Georg, 2021. "The legitimacy gap of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector: Why it arises and how to address it," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Tara Merk, 2024. "Why to DAO: a narrative analysis of the drivers of tokenized Exit to Community," Papers 2407.14327, arXiv.org.
    3. Hazel Si Min Lim & Araz Taeihagh, 2019. "Algorithmic Decision-Making in AVs: Understanding Ethical and Technical Concerns for Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    4. Haifei Yu & Shanshan Zheng & Hao Wu, 2023. "User Privacy Awareness, Incentive and Data Supply Chain Pricing Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Buhmann, Alexander & Fieseler, Christian, 2021. "Towards a deliberative framework for responsible innovation in artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Claire M. Segijn & Joanna Strycharz & Amy Riegelman & Cody Hennesy, 2021. "A Literature Review of Personalization Transparency and Control: Introducing the Transparency–Awareness–Control Framework," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 120-133.
    7. Cobbe, Jennifer & Veale, Michael & Singh, Jatinder, 2023. "Understanding Accountability in Algorithmic Supply Chains," SocArXiv p4sey, Center for Open Science.
    8. Kirsten Martin & Ari Waldman, 2023. "Are Algorithmic Decisions Legitimate? The Effect of Process and Outcomes on Perceptions of Legitimacy of AI Decisions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 653-670, March.
    9. Veale, Michael & Binns, Reuben & Van Kleek, Max, 2018. "Some HCI Priorities for GDPR-Compliant Machine Learning," LawArchive wm6yk_v1, Center for Open Science.
    10. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    11. Veale, Michael, 2017. "Logics and practices of transparency and opacity in real-world applications of public sector machine learning," SocArXiv 6cdhe, Center for Open Science.
    12. Söderlund, Kasia & Engström, Emma & Haresamudram, Kashyap & Larsson, Stefan & Strimling, Pontus, 2024. "Regulating high-reach AI: On transparency directions in the Digital Services Act," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 13(1), pages 1-31.
    13. Mazur Joanna, 2019. "Automated Decision-Making and the Precautionary Principle in EU Law," TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 9(4), pages 3-18, December.
    14. Daniela Sele & Marina Chugunova, 2023. "Putting a Human in the Loop: Increasing Uptake, but Decreasing Accuracy of Automated Decision-Making," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 438, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    15. Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius & Joost Poort, 2017. "Online Price Discrimination and EU Data Privacy Law," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 347-366, September.
    16. M. Leszczynska & D. Baltag, 2024. "“Can I have it non-personalised?” An Empirical Investigation of Consumer Willingness to Share Data for Personalized Services and Ads," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 345-372, September.
    17. Veale, Michael & Van Kleek, Max & Binns, Reuben, 2018. "Fairness and Accountability Design Needs for Algorithmic Support in High-Stakes Public Sector Decision-Making," SocArXiv 8kvf4, Center for Open Science.
    18. Kira J.M. Matus & Michael Veale, 2022. "Certification systems for machine learning: Lessons from sustainability," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 177-196, January.
    19. Marc Alier & Maria Jose Casañ Guerrero & Daniel Amo & Charles Severance & David Fonseca, 2021. "Privacy and E-Learning: A Pending Task," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    20. Larisa Găbudeanu & Iulia Brici & Codruța Mare & Ioan Cosmin Mihai & Mircea Constantin Șcheau, 2021. "Privacy Intrusiveness in Financial-Banking Fraud Detection," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-22, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:10:s0308596124001484. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.