{"title":"欧盟《通用数据保护条例》下的数据保护影响评估:女性主义反思","authors":"Alessandra Calvi","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Can the Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) under Article 35 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) address the power imbalances between those in control of information and the most vulnerable and marginalised persons to whom this information refers? Put another way, can DPIA be considered a feminist tool?</p><p>Whilst data protection scholars and regulators consider DPIA a promising instrument for the protection of the fundamental rights threatened by personal data processing, particularly when performed by automated systems, a feminist critique thereof, essential to comprehensively evaluate whether such optimism is justified, is still missing. This contribution addresses this knowledge gap using a combination of doctrinal and non-doctrinal analysis, feminist legal methods and intersectionality.</p><p>Building on the state of the art about DPIA, I revisit its advantages and drawbacks through feminist lenses, concluding that DPIA cannot be considered a feminist tool as such. Yet, it could still serve feminist goals and become an empowering instrument for data subjects. For that, my proposals are to incorporate feminist legal methods and intersectionality principles in the process and to conceptualise a “right to DPIA”.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data Protection Impact Assessment under the EU General Data Protection Regulation: A feminist reflection\",\"authors\":\"Alessandra Calvi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Can the Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) under Article 35 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) address the power imbalances between those in control of information and the most vulnerable and marginalised persons to whom this information refers? Put another way, can DPIA be considered a feminist tool?</p><p>Whilst data protection scholars and regulators consider DPIA a promising instrument for the protection of the fundamental rights threatened by personal data processing, particularly when performed by automated systems, a feminist critique thereof, essential to comprehensively evaluate whether such optimism is justified, is still missing. This contribution addresses this knowledge gap using a combination of doctrinal and non-doctrinal analysis, feminist legal methods and intersectionality.</p><p>Building on the state of the art about DPIA, I revisit its advantages and drawbacks through feminist lenses, concluding that DPIA cannot be considered a feminist tool as such. Yet, it could still serve feminist goals and become an empowering instrument for data subjects. For that, my proposals are to incorporate feminist legal methods and intersectionality principles in the process and to conceptualise a “right to DPIA”.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computer Law & Security Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computer Law & Security Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364924000177\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364924000177","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Data Protection Impact Assessment under the EU General Data Protection Regulation: A feminist reflection
Can the Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) under Article 35 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) address the power imbalances between those in control of information and the most vulnerable and marginalised persons to whom this information refers? Put another way, can DPIA be considered a feminist tool?
Whilst data protection scholars and regulators consider DPIA a promising instrument for the protection of the fundamental rights threatened by personal data processing, particularly when performed by automated systems, a feminist critique thereof, essential to comprehensively evaluate whether such optimism is justified, is still missing. This contribution addresses this knowledge gap using a combination of doctrinal and non-doctrinal analysis, feminist legal methods and intersectionality.
Building on the state of the art about DPIA, I revisit its advantages and drawbacks through feminist lenses, concluding that DPIA cannot be considered a feminist tool as such. Yet, it could still serve feminist goals and become an empowering instrument for data subjects. For that, my proposals are to incorporate feminist legal methods and intersectionality principles in the process and to conceptualise a “right to DPIA”.
期刊介绍:
CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.