A comparison of primary stakeholders’ views on the deployment of biometric technologies in border management: Case study of SMart mobILity at the European land borders

Abstract

Advances in technology have a substantial impact on every aspect of our lives, ranging from the way we communicate to the way we travel. The Smart mobility at the European land borders (SMILE) project is geared towards the deployment of biometric technologies to optimize and monitor the flow of people at land borders. However, despite the anticipated benefits of deploying biometric technologies in border control, there are still divergent views on the use of such technologies by two primary stakeholders-travelers and border authorities. In this paper, we provide a comparison of travelers' and border authorities' views on the deployment of biometric technologies in border management. The overall goal of this study is to enable us to understand the concerns of travelers and border guards in order to facilitate the acceptance of biometric technologies for a secure and more convenient border crossing. Our method of inquiry consisted of in-person interviews with border guards (SMILE project's end users), observation and field visits (to the Hungarian-Romanian and Bulgarian-Romanian borders) and questionnaires for both travelers and border guards. As a result of our investigation, two conflicting trends emerged. On one hand, border guards argued that biometric technologies had the potential to be a very effective tool that would enhance security levels and make traveler identification and authentication procedures easy, fast and convenient. On the other hand, travelers were more concerned about the technologies representing a threat to fundamental rights, personal privacy and data protection.

National Identification Systems As Enablers of Online Identity

“…NIDS face the risk of "function creep," a phenomenon where the systems, initially intended for specific uses, are gradually applied to unrelated contexts [50]. The possible ramifications include the erosion of privacy and the creation of a pervasive surveillance state.…”

Modeling Key Strategies for Reducing Socio-Economic and Health Crisis: Perspective from COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Sealing the border [93][94][95][96] Governments has successfully sealed off their countries in the past to prevent disease.…”

The Ethics of Facial Recognition Technologies, Surveillance and Accountability in an Age of Artificial Intelligence: A Comparative Analysis of USA, EU and UK Regulatory Frameworks

“…As such, reaching a consensus in technological rollouts will be a journey. Even in the example of border controls, where ID data have always been exchanged, studies have shown that the views of travellers on acceptable technologies differ from the views of board control guards [5].…”

“…For example in the context of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), there have been hearings in Washington on the acceptable use of FRT. 5 At this hearing, it was stated that the "FBI has limited information on the accuracy of its face recognition technology capabilities." These hearings called for greater accountability and transparency in the use of the technologies, although definitive outcomes from the hearings are still awaited.…”