Who's Keeping Score?: Oversight of Changing Consumer Credit Infrastructure

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q3 BUSINESS
Janine S. Hiller, Lindsay Sain Jones
{"title":"Who's Keeping Score?: Oversight of Changing Consumer Credit Infrastructure","authors":"Janine S. Hiller,&nbsp;Lindsay Sain Jones","doi":"10.1111/ablj.12199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Access to credit in the United States is contingent upon an individual obtaining the “right” credit score. Yet the opaque scoring system makes it nearly impossible for an individual to break out of a cycle of low credit ratings and participate in the benefits of the American economy. Partially as a response, alternative credit rating products now use personal nonfinancial data for automated credit decision-making, purportedly intended to expand access to credit. Social media activity, college grades, and even what time of day a person applies for a loan are examples of data points used for this purpose. However, these and other alternative data can be highly correlated with protected traits, such as race and national origin. While extending access to credit equitably across society is an important goal, the cure should not exacerbate the same inequalities that it is designed to address. The necessity of credit for the modern consumer compels continued oversight of the credit infrastructure to ensure fair data practices and to hold participants accountable. This article contends that consumer access to a fair credit score is a necessity, and that the consumer credit infrastructure should be viewed as a modern utility and subject to additional oversight. A proposal is then advanced that establishes fair data duties for credit scoring entities.</p>","PeriodicalId":54186,"journal":{"name":"American Business Law Journal","volume":"59 1","pages":"61-121"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ablj.12199","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Business Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ablj.12199","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Access to credit in the United States is contingent upon an individual obtaining the “right” credit score. Yet the opaque scoring system makes it nearly impossible for an individual to break out of a cycle of low credit ratings and participate in the benefits of the American economy. Partially as a response, alternative credit rating products now use personal nonfinancial data for automated credit decision-making, purportedly intended to expand access to credit. Social media activity, college grades, and even what time of day a person applies for a loan are examples of data points used for this purpose. However, these and other alternative data can be highly correlated with protected traits, such as race and national origin. While extending access to credit equitably across society is an important goal, the cure should not exacerbate the same inequalities that it is designed to address. The necessity of credit for the modern consumer compels continued oversight of the credit infrastructure to ensure fair data practices and to hold participants accountable. This article contends that consumer access to a fair credit score is a necessity, and that the consumer credit infrastructure should be viewed as a modern utility and subject to additional oversight. A proposal is then advanced that establishes fair data duties for credit scoring entities.

谁在保持分数?:消费者信贷基础设施变化的监督
在美国,获得信贷取决于个人获得“正确”的信用评分。然而,不透明的评分系统使得个人几乎不可能打破低信用评级的循环,并参与美国经济的利益。部分作为回应,另类信用评级产品现在使用个人非财务数据进行自动信用决策,据称是为了扩大获得信贷的渠道。社交媒体活动,大学成绩,甚至一个人申请贷款的时间都是用于此目的的数据点的例子。然而,这些和其他替代数据可能与受保护的特征高度相关,例如种族和国籍。虽然让全社会公平地获得信贷是一个重要目标,但解决方案不应加剧其旨在解决的不平等问题。现代消费者对信贷的需求迫使对信贷基础设施进行持续监督,以确保公平的数据实践,并让参与者承担责任。本文认为,消费者获得公平的信用评分是必要的,消费者信贷基础设施应被视为现代公用事业,并受到额外的监督。然后提出了一项建议,为信用评分实体建立公平的数据义务。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The ABLJ is a faculty-edited, double blind peer reviewed journal, continuously published since 1963. Our mission is to publish only top quality law review articles that make a scholarly contribution to all areas of law that impact business theory and practice. We search for those articles that articulate a novel research question and make a meaningful contribution directly relevant to scholars and practitioners of business law. The blind peer review process means legal scholars well-versed in the relevant specialty area have determined selected articles are original, thorough, important, and timely. Faculty editors assure the authors’ contribution to scholarship is evident. We aim to elevate legal scholarship and inform responsible business decisions.
×
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