IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v14y2020i3p447-464.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting the governance of privacy: Contemporary policy instruments in global perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Colin J. Bennett
  • Charles D. Raab

Abstract

The repertoire of policy instruments within a particular policy sector varies by jurisdiction; some “tools of government” are associated with particular administrative and regulatory traditions and political cultures. It is less clear how the instruments associated with a particular policy sector may change over time, as economic, social, and technological conditions evolve. In the early 2000s, we surveyed and analyzed the global repertoire of policy instruments deployed to protect personal data. In this article, we explore how those instruments have changed as a result of 15 years of social, economic and technological transformations, during which the issue has assumed a far higher global profile, as one of the central policy questions associated with modern networked communications. We review the contemporary range of transnational, regulatory, self‐regulatory, and technical instruments according to the same framework, and conclude that the types of policy instrument have remained relatively stable, even though they are now deployed on a global scale. While the labels remain the same, however, the conceptual foundations for their legitimation and justification are shifting as greater emphases on accountability, risk, ethics, and the social/political value of privacy have gained purchase. Our analysis demonstrates both continuity and change within the governance of privacy, and displays how we would have tackled the same research project today. As a broader case study of regulation, it highlights the importance of going beyond technical and instrumental labels. Change or stability of policy instruments does not take place in isolation from the wider conceptualizations that shape their meaning, purpose, and effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Colin J. Bennett & Charles D. Raab, 2020. "Revisiting the governance of privacy: Contemporary policy instruments in global perspective," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 447-464, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:14:y:2020:i:3:p:447-464
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12222
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12222?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colin J. Bennett, 2012. "The Accountability Approach to Privacy and Data Protection: Assumptions and Caveats," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Guagnin & Leon Hempel & Carla Ilten & Inga Kroener & Daniel Neyland & Hector Postigo (ed.), Managing Privacy through Accountability, chapter 2, pages 33-48, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Black, Julia, 2008. "Forms and paradoxes of principles-based regulation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 23103, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1989. "Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-58, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matti Minkkinen & Markus Philipp Zimmer & Matti Mäntymäki, 2023. "Co-Shaping an Ecosystem for Responsible AI: Five Types of Expectation Work in Response to a Technological Frame," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 103-121, February.

    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. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    2. Blánaid Clarke & Niamh Hardiman, 2012. "Crisis in the Irish Banking System," Working Papers 201203, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. Giliberto Capano & Andrea Lippi, 2017. "How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 269-293, June.
    4. Shaun Elder, 2014. "Does the GFC as a change agent of financial regulatory models and approaches in Europe provide lessons for Asia?," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 419-430, December.
    5. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    6. Lihi Lahat, 2011. "How can leaders’ perceptions guide policy analysis in an era of governance?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(2), pages 135-155, June.
    7. Bray, David J. & Taylor, Michael A.P. & Scrafton, Derek, 2011. "Transport policy in Australia--Evolution, learning and policy transfer," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 522-532, May.
    8. Daugbjerg, Carsten & Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 2001. "Designing green taxes in a political context: From optimal to feasible environmental regulation," Working Papers 01-17, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    9. Pečarič Mirko, 2020. "Regulatory Cybernetics: Adaptability and Probability in the Public Administration’s Regulations," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 133-156, June.
    10. Alice Moseley & Oliver James, 2008. "Central State Steering of Local Collaboration: Assessing the Impact of Tools of Meta-governance in Homelessness Services in England," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 117-136, June.
    11. Annalisa Caloffi & Marco Mariani, 2018. "Regional policy mixes for enterprise and innovation: A fuzzy-set clustering approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 28-46, February.
    12. Qingduo Mao & Ben Ma & Hongshuai Wang & Qi Bian, 2019. "Investigating Policy Instrument Adoption in Low-Carbon City Development: A Case Study from China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-17, September.
    13. Zejin Liu & Steven Van de Walle, 2022. "The role of demonstration projects as policy instruments in the development of nonprofit organizations: Beyond instrumentality," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(4), pages 233-244, October.
    14. Casula, Mattia & Toth, Federico, 2021. "The 2017 Italian reform on mandatory childhood vaccinations: Analysis of the policy process and early implementation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 7-11.
    15. Anat Gofen & Adam M. Wellstead & Noa Tal, 2023. "Devil in the details? Policy settings and calibrations of national excellence-centers," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 301-323, June.
    16. Cheng, Quan & Yi, Hongtao, 2017. "Complementarity and substitutability: A review of state level renewable energy policy instrument interactions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 683-691.
    17. Sharon Gilad, 2011. "Institutionalizing fairness in financial markets: Mission impossible?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 309-332, September.
    18. Kenneth Patrick Vincent O'Sullivan & Stephen Kinsella, 2013. "Financial and regulatory failure: The case of Ireland," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Berryl Claire Asiago, 2017. "Rules of Engagement: A Review of Regulatory Instruments Designed to Promote and Secure Local Content Requirements in the Oil and Gas Sector," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, September.
    20. Eyert, Florian & Irgmaier, Florian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2022. "Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 23-44.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:reggov:v:14:y:2020:i:3:p:447-464. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.