Final Report Summary - DIGIDEAS (Social and ethical aspects of digital identities. Towards a value sensitive identity management)
With digitisation and automation processes pervading virtually all aspects and domains of society, the routine registration of personal identifiable data is increasing exponentially. The implied risks and challenges to fundamental rights like privacy and non-discrimination are recognized on the highest policy levels, but also need careful academic analysis to be understood. In view of the fact that ‘identity’ is also a key concept in contemporary social theory, and in contemporary conceptualisations of the relation between technology and society, ethics and normativity, a field of enquiry emerges at the crossroads of contemporary theoretical, technological and societal developments representing opportunities for frontier research.
The overall aims of the DigIDeas project have been to increase understanding and awareness of the social and ethical aspects of digital identification practices, and to develop insight into the way digitization is implicated in contemporary transformations of identity. The project set out to achieve these goals by bringing recent insights gained from several disciplines (social studies of science and technology, surveillance studies, philosophy (social philosophy and philosophy of technology) and computer ethics) to bear on the issues concerned.
The core of the programme consisted of three interdisciplinary PhD projects, each focussing on different empirical domains where developments in digitization plays a crucial role in transforming practice, with significant implications for identities. The areas studied have included the following:
- The introduction and use of new digital technologies like automatic number plate recognition (ANPR), geographic information systems (GIS), and social media monitoring tools in daily policing in Romania and The Netherlands, and their transformative effects regarding not only policing as a professional practice, but also regarding the very definition of what counts as ‘suspect’.
- The introduction and use of new registration and information sharing systems in child protection, youth care, and juvenile crime prevention practices, such as electronic child records and early warning systems, with a specific focus on the classification and profiling of children as `risk’, as well as being at `risk’.
- The use of digital identification, verification and risk profiling tools in migration management and border management, with a particular focus on the role of these tools in shaping perception and treatment of migrants and travellers as either being at risk, or as posing a risk.
- The deployment by marketers of social media and online tools for consumer profiling and targeting consumers, in particular in loyalty programmes, and in ‘advergames’ that specifically target children as potential consumers, as well as the strategies and technical tools parents and other stakeholders employ to render the internet `safe’ for children.
The technologies and practices studied generate much controversy; in this light, one persistent finding throughout the range of empirical domains we studied stands out: the use of these technologies produces particular realities, which are subsequently drawn upon to (morally) legitimize their use. For example, profiling children through online marketing and monitoring tools results in the construction of children’s identities as ‘competent consumers’ with particular tastes and preferences, which is subsequently invoked to legitimize this monitoring and profiling, and using these technologically and psychologically highly sophisticated marketing strategies on them. Similarly, while police online monitoring activities are legally required to be ‘case-based’ (concrete ‘suspicion’) only, the very use of monitoring tools changes what counts as a ‘case’ and as ‘suspect’ in such a way that increased monitoring seems legitimate. Comparable circular mechanisms have been found in the study of identification and risk assessment tools in youth care and migration management, where the very functioning and use of the systems to some extent produce a tendency to reinforce perceptions of risk, that are subsequently cited to justify more intensive monitoring, more information sharing, and more systems.
The overall aims of the DigIDeas project have been to increase understanding and awareness of the social and ethical aspects of digital identification practices, and to develop insight into the way digitization is implicated in contemporary transformations of identity. The project set out to achieve these goals by bringing recent insights gained from several disciplines (social studies of science and technology, surveillance studies, philosophy (social philosophy and philosophy of technology) and computer ethics) to bear on the issues concerned.
The core of the programme consisted of three interdisciplinary PhD projects, each focussing on different empirical domains where developments in digitization plays a crucial role in transforming practice, with significant implications for identities. The areas studied have included the following:
- The introduction and use of new digital technologies like automatic number plate recognition (ANPR), geographic information systems (GIS), and social media monitoring tools in daily policing in Romania and The Netherlands, and their transformative effects regarding not only policing as a professional practice, but also regarding the very definition of what counts as ‘suspect’.
- The introduction and use of new registration and information sharing systems in child protection, youth care, and juvenile crime prevention practices, such as electronic child records and early warning systems, with a specific focus on the classification and profiling of children as `risk’, as well as being at `risk’.
- The use of digital identification, verification and risk profiling tools in migration management and border management, with a particular focus on the role of these tools in shaping perception and treatment of migrants and travellers as either being at risk, or as posing a risk.
- The deployment by marketers of social media and online tools for consumer profiling and targeting consumers, in particular in loyalty programmes, and in ‘advergames’ that specifically target children as potential consumers, as well as the strategies and technical tools parents and other stakeholders employ to render the internet `safe’ for children.
The technologies and practices studied generate much controversy; in this light, one persistent finding throughout the range of empirical domains we studied stands out: the use of these technologies produces particular realities, which are subsequently drawn upon to (morally) legitimize their use. For example, profiling children through online marketing and monitoring tools results in the construction of children’s identities as ‘competent consumers’ with particular tastes and preferences, which is subsequently invoked to legitimize this monitoring and profiling, and using these technologically and psychologically highly sophisticated marketing strategies on them. Similarly, while police online monitoring activities are legally required to be ‘case-based’ (concrete ‘suspicion’) only, the very use of monitoring tools changes what counts as a ‘case’ and as ‘suspect’ in such a way that increased monitoring seems legitimate. Comparable circular mechanisms have been found in the study of identification and risk assessment tools in youth care and migration management, where the very functioning and use of the systems to some extent produce a tendency to reinforce perceptions of risk, that are subsequently cited to justify more intensive monitoring, more information sharing, and more systems.