Cross-border data sharing for research in Africa: an analysis of the data protection and research ethics requirements in 12 jurisdictions.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2025-03-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsaf002
Ciara Staunton, Aliki Edgcumbe, Lukman Abdulrauf, Amy Gooden, Paul Ogendi, Donrich Thaldar
{"title":"Cross-border data sharing for research in Africa: an analysis of the data protection and research ethics requirements in 12 jurisdictions.","authors":"Ciara Staunton, Aliki Edgcumbe, Lukman Abdulrauf, Amy Gooden, Paul Ogendi, Donrich Thaldar","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsaf002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, there has been a notable uptake in genomic and health-related research activities across the African continent. Similarly, there has been increased introduction of data protection legislation that affects the sharing of personal data, such as health data and genomic data, including for research. Many of these statutes have stricter requirements when sharing personal data across borders. Consequently, the cross-border sharing of health data, that includes genetic data, requires careful navigation of the pertinent data protection legislation, in particular concerning the sharing of such data for research purposes. To help researchers navigate these legal frameworks, 12 African countries were analysed to develop country guides on cross-border data sharing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 12 African countries that were analysed, 10 have data protection laws in place (Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe), while two countries (Cameroon and The Gambia) do not. (At the time of the study, Cameroon did not have a data protection regulation in place. Law No. 2024/017 on the Protection of Personal Data is now in force.) With the exception of Ghana, all countries with data protection statutes had additional requirements to be met when sharing personal data across borders. Consent and adequacy are the most common grounds for justifying the sharing of personal data across borders.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the limitations of the current models of consent, consent is not a suitable basis to transfer large quantities of data for research. Adequacy is a common ground, but there are national differences in the implementation of this ground. Researchers must therefore analyse each national legal framework and make decisions on a case-by-case and country-by-country basis.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"12 1","pages":"lsaf002"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11921095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaf002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In recent years, there has been a notable uptake in genomic and health-related research activities across the African continent. Similarly, there has been increased introduction of data protection legislation that affects the sharing of personal data, such as health data and genomic data, including for research. Many of these statutes have stricter requirements when sharing personal data across borders. Consequently, the cross-border sharing of health data, that includes genetic data, requires careful navigation of the pertinent data protection legislation, in particular concerning the sharing of such data for research purposes. To help researchers navigate these legal frameworks, 12 African countries were analysed to develop country guides on cross-border data sharing.

Results: Of the 12 African countries that were analysed, 10 have data protection laws in place (Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe), while two countries (Cameroon and The Gambia) do not. (At the time of the study, Cameroon did not have a data protection regulation in place. Law No. 2024/017 on the Protection of Personal Data is now in force.) With the exception of Ghana, all countries with data protection statutes had additional requirements to be met when sharing personal data across borders. Consent and adequacy are the most common grounds for justifying the sharing of personal data across borders.

Conclusion: Given the limitations of the current models of consent, consent is not a suitable basis to transfer large quantities of data for research. Adequacy is a common ground, but there are national differences in the implementation of this ground. Researchers must therefore analyse each national legal framework and make decisions on a case-by-case and country-by-country basis.

非洲研究跨境数据共享:对12个司法管辖区数据保护和研究伦理要求的分析。
背景:近年来,整个非洲大陆在基因组和健康相关研究活动方面取得了显著进展。同样,越来越多地采用了影响个人数据共享的数据保护立法,例如健康数据和基因组数据,包括用于研究的数据共享。在跨境共享个人数据时,许多此类法规都有更严格的要求。因此,跨境共享健康数据,包括遗传数据,需要仔细斟酌有关的数据保护立法,特别是关于为研究目的共享这类数据的立法。为了帮助科学家驾驭这些法律框架,对12个非洲国家进行了分析,以制定跨境数据共享的国家指南。结果:在我们分析的12个非洲国家中,有10个国家制定了数据保护法(博茨瓦纳、加纳、肯尼亚、马拉维、尼日利亚、卢旺达、南非、坦桑尼亚、乌干达和津巴布韦),而两个国家(喀麦隆和冈比亚)没有。(在进行这项研究时,喀麦隆没有数据保护法规。关于保护个人资料的第2024/017号法律现已生效。)除加纳外,所有制定数据保护法规的国家在跨境共享个人数据时都需要满足额外的要求。同意和充分性是跨境共享个人数据最常见的理由。结论:鉴于当前同意模式的局限性,同意不是转移大量数据用于研究的合适依据。充足性是一个共同的基础,但各国在执行这一基础方面存在差异。因此,研究人员必须分析每个国家的法律框架,并在逐个案例和逐个国家的基础上做出决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信