Balancing privacy rights and surveillance analytics: a decision process guide

Abstract

The right to privacy has been discussed by scholars in multiple disciplines, yet privacy issues are increasing due to technological advances and lower costs for organisations to adopt smart surveillance. Given the potential for misuse, it seems prudent for stakeholders to critically evaluate Surveillance Analytics (SA) innovations. To assist in balancing the issues arising from SA adoption and the implications for privacy, we review key terms and ethical frameworks. Further, we prescribe a two-by-two Surveillance, Privacy, and Ethical Decision (SPED) Process Guide. SPED recommends the use of one or more of three ethical frameworks, Consequence, Duty, and Virtue. The vertical axis in the SPED matrix is the sophistication of an organisation's SA and the horizontal axis is an assessment of the current privacy level and the rights afforded to the target(s) of surveillance. The proposed decision process guide can assist senior managers and technologists in making decisions about adopting SA.

Catching up with AI: Pushing toward a cohesive governance framework

“…AI does not understand human values, nor the implications of the age, race, ethnicity, and health conditions of an individual. It will only make decisions based on its algorithms (Power et al, 2021). Thus, monitoring is necessary to avoid potential civil rights violations.…”

Ethical Implications of Advanced Surveillance Technologies on Law Enforcement: A Case Study of National Police Service in County of Nairobi, Kenya

“…Singh (2022) further noted that regulations should specify how and when particular technologies can be used to prevent them from being used arbitrarily for purposes that may not necessarily advance the security and safety of the larger public. Power et al (2021) also recommended establishing guidelines and regulations concerning data privacy and security that specify how law enforcement agencies collect data using surveillance technologies. In this case, the regulations also need to specify how the collected information should be stored, shared, and accessed, outlining the people responsible at each stage.…”

“…Public education provides a forum through which public members are engaged in informed debates and discussions on the ethical approaches that should be adopted in using advanced surveillance technologies to maintain law and order. Power et al (2021) concurs that public education forums on the use of surveillance technologies enhance a sense of community engagement whereby law enforcement agencies and any other relevant stakeholders are brought on board to discuss issues on the use of new technologies. The involvement of the public in these discussions makes all stakeholders, more particularly members of the public, better informed.…”

Digital Age: Surveillance Culture under Artistic Intervention

“…The application of surveillance technologies should operate within the framework of ethical considerations. For instance, Power et al (2021) Y. X. Li proposed a process guide for ethical decision-making (SPED) in their research, quantifying the horizontal and vertical relationships between privacy rights and ethical levels to guide managerial decision-making processes. Secondly, within the premise of adhering to transparency principles, establishing legal frameworks to delimit the scope of surveillance activities is crucial.…”